Slashdot Mirror

It's time the species got that lesson, and stopped using the world we rely on as a toilet.

So we can poop, but we just have to go to Mars to do so?

Perhaps you missed this important book on the matter...

Umm? Or how about this?

Maybe you should stop buying cables at brick and mortar stores? They always rip you off on cables, no exceptions - the theory being, I imagine, that you need to have the cable right now or else you wouldn't be buying it from them.

Connie Willis wrote an interesting story called Remake.

All dead actors rights were under license and it was more cost effective to use dead actors then unknown live actors.

http://www.amazon.com/Remake-Connie-Willis/dp/0553374370

Wow! Really? Apple's Gross Profit Margin is 41% whereas Microsoft's is 84.8%. Looks like MS has the higher profit margin, at more than twice Apple's. And I didn't know Amazon and Bestbuy were boutique retailers. Or are you just showing your anti-Apple bias?

Falcon

Thought you were mistaken or trying to be funny when you mentioned "slide ruler" but I see they do exist:

http://www.amazon.com/ThinkGeek-Slide-Ruler/dp/B003M5B84C

my rule is: if in doubt, choose C. It's still in heavy use after almost forty years for a reason.

Now I'm working on the book Learn C on the Mac. As I said in another post most of what's taught in college now, and has been for years, is Windows. I need a refresher for C and C++, though I'm thinking of working on Objective C next, and because I'm using a Mac now I thought I'd try that book. Then I want to get a book on C programming on Linux, I have a Linux PC I want to set up as a server and I want to dual-boot my laptop.

You can justify it all you want from a code readability perspective, but the fact remains that it leads to really awkward coding practices, like indenting function bodies sixteen spaces just in case you need to add another nesting level.

I have trouble reading code that isn't indented and nested. Of course I don't read much code and if I did I might get better. Then again there's a lot to be said about readability.

It brings back memories of BASIC and line numbering every ten lines.

I first programmed use line numbers for every line, of course they were numbered 10, 20, 30. I was shocked the first tyme I saw a BASIC listing that was not numbered every line, I thought there was something wrong with the listing.

Falcon

The story is either here or here. I don't remember which, but they're both well worth reading.

The story is either here or here. I don't remember which, but they're both well worth reading.

Have you read a snigle history book?

No, but I have read a sniglet book.

[ducks]

"Question: Why exactly would you WANT this?"

Seriously? I guess you're serious, but this comes from the "why do I want a color screen/camera/internet/touchscreen on my phone" crowd.

Here's a shocker: people play games on their phones. Angry Birds has been purchased by 6.5 million people. That's a lot, and that's not even a good game. EA makes iPhone games like SimCity, Need for Speed, Spore and Command and Conquer Red Alert. Square Enix makes a little game called Final Fantasy. Yes, that Final Fantasy. the real final fantasy. Even small developers are making a million dollars a month off iPhone games.

Sony has no choice: iPhone had 19% of the portable software revenue in 2009 compared to the PSP's 11%. That's amazing for a device that was only 2 years old at the time, that's triple the 5% the iPhone had in 2008.

As for batteries running dead... well, that happens. You can run down your battery watching Youtube videos or constantly checking Facebook. The "think about the battery!" excuse is played out, people said the same thing when they added color screens to phones and again when cameras were added and again when giant LCD touchscreens were added. If you don't like it, don't buy a smartphone or buy a case that charges the phone.

Seriously, use the summary to link to the friggen source. http://aws.amazon.com/route53/

And such relationships can work both ways.

You've made an excellent argument for learning from knowledgeable other people with hands on experience about some area of interest, but, sadly, such people can only rarely be found in conventional schools...
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201003/when-less-is-more-the-case-teaching-less-math-in-schools
    http://www.ted.com/talks/gever_tulley_on_5_dangerous_things_for_kids.html

And you ignore the other baggage professional teachers come with:
    http://www.newciv.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt
    http://www.the-open-boat.com/Gatto.html
    http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/

Why not just watch a video series instead, and ask questions online?
    http://www.learner.org/
    http://www.khanacademy.org/
    http://www.explorelearning.com/

Of find some other alternative arrangement, including knowledgeable mentors among family, friends, or in the community?
    http://www.educationrevolution.org/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling

Is that really going to be that much worse than trying to learn from most "teachers" (who if you've ever been aroudn teacher training programs, you would see generally know little about math, science, and technology), as well meaning as most of them may be? The first thing most schools do is destroy a child's natural ability to learn and natural creativity:
    http://www.amazon.com/Scientist-Crib-Early-Learning-Tells/dp/0688177883
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=related

Here is an alternative funding model for hiring private tutors or having neighborhoods again where people have time to share their knowledge freely, based on just giving public school funds directly to the parents:
    http://www.pdfernhout.net/towards-a-post-scarcity-new-york-state-of-mind.html
   

I find it strange that this link (caution, links to a site selling RC material)

http://www.amazon.com/Leisure-Suit-Larry-Magna-Laude-Pc/dp/B0001XLMTY/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1291536607&sr=8-10

under the filter proposal would cause all of amazon.com to be blocked in Australia. Over a game that is a joke the whole way through. Hopefully it would be re-classified after this change.

What is "You" is both tangible substance, your body, and intangible substance, your "form".
...
You remain You no matter the state of your being.

Actually there's a growing amount of evidence that what you think of as "you" is neither a singular nor consistent thing. The perception that our consciousness is unified and "the same person" throughout life is mostly an illusion.

Read Robert Ornstein's Multimind and Tor Nørretranders The User Illusion for a good introduction.

What is "You" is both tangible substance, your body, and intangible substance, your "form".
...
You remain You no matter the state of your being.

Actually there's a growing amount of evidence that what you think of as "you" is neither a singular nor consistent thing. The perception that our consciousness is unified and "the same person" throughout life is mostly an illusion.

Read Robert Ornstein's Multimind and Tor Nørretranders The User Illusion for a good introduction.

I'm sure that given a certain preexisting worldview, Lieberman's claims would seem pretty damning. However, Amazon flat out denies that government pressure was behind their dumping of Wikileaks as a customer.

Message

There have been reports that a government inquiry prompted us not to serve WikiLeaks any longer. That is inaccurate.

There have also been reports that it was prompted by massive DDOS attacks. That too is inaccurate. There were indeed large-scale DDOS attacks, but they were successfully defended against.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) rents computer infrastructure on a self-service basis. AWS does not pre-screen its customers, but it does have terms of service that must be followed. WikiLeaks was not following them. There were several parts they were violating. For example, our terms of service state that “you represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content that use of the content you supply does not violate this policy and will not cause injury to any person or entity.” It’s clear that WikiLeaks doesn’t own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content. Further, it is not credible that the extraordinary volume of 250,000 classified documents that WikiLeaks is publishing could have been carefully redacted in such a way as to ensure that they weren’t putting innocent people in jeopardy. Human rights organizations have in fact written to WikiLeaks asking them to exercise caution and not release the names or identities of human rights defenders who might be persecuted by their governments.

We’ve been running AWS for over four years and have hundreds of thousands of customers storing all kinds of data on AWS. Some of this data is controversial, and that’s perfectly fine. But, when companies or people go about securing and storing large quantities of data that isn’t rightfully theirs, and publishing this data without ensuring it won’t injure others, it’s a violation of our terms of service, and folks need to go operate elsewhere.

We look forward to continuing to serve our AWS customers and are excited about several new things we have coming your way in the next few months.

— Amazon Web Services

http://www.smarthome.com/77964/Stop-Adjusting-the-Volume-Every-Few-Minutes/p.aspx

http://www.amazon.com/DCT-6S-Television-Leveling-Featuring-TruVolume/dp/B003H4QR3K

There are more... but I'll spare you all the links.

(Are there any fanboys I haven't offended with this? I'm trying to be thorough.)

I'm still waiting for a 1760 node cluster of these.

Amnesia and Alzheimer's is enough proof we don't have souls, no doubt what we call "consciousness" is really just a network of developed cells and memories that are attached to it. After all no one claims to be able to remember what it was like as an embryo, also when one is under amnesia. One's "soul" doesn't float away. The concept of "soul" is just our irrational psychic defense against the fact we all die someday. That so many peoples and cultures have come up with an afterlife speaks volumes that it is just a reaction against our powerlessness to heal and fix ourselves because of the expense, energy, intelligence and tools to do so.

We experience the self as a unified thing but it isn't. This is proven by people who've had brain damage in accidents and strokes where their "self" functions but they lose specific functions and aspects of 'who they are'.

You can find out more by reading the following book by a Neurologist.

This is Damasio's refutation of the Cartesian idea of the human mind as separate from bodily processes draws on neurochemistry to support his claim that emotions play a central role in human decision making.

http://www.amazon.com/Descartes-Error-Emotion-Reason-Human/dp/014303622X/

Also related clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

You're actually thinking of something that appeared in "The Way Things REALLY Work".

"Refusing arguments by analogy is absurd."

It is because the brain works on metaphors. Metaphors are partially equal comparisons of the structure or relationships of what is being compared.

http://www.amazon.com/Metaphors-Live-METAPHORS-LIVE--OS/dp/B001TI9FYE/

Whenever I see family/friends/co-workers using external drives for "backup" I have to repress the urge to launch into a lecture on the absurdity of relying on a local, always mounted backup.

WesternDigital and all the other purveyors of external hard disks should be ashamed of themselves for promoting their products as a reasonable backup solution. The ONLY kind of calamity that such devices protect you from is accidental deletion or hardware failure. An external drive provides absolutely no protection from any kind of malicious attack or catastrophic disaster (flood, fire, theft). The only real backup solution is an off-site backup. Considering how cheap Amazon S3 is, off-site backups are finally a real solution for the average person.

Apple's Time Machine and Fly Back is a step in the right direction, but without a real off-site backup solution kiss your data goodbye, because when it falls into a river of molten rock, man, it's gone.

They're cheap enough to buy several of them and swap them out periodically.

If you have enough crap to justify using public storage, it makes a lot of sense. And, frankly, no amount of encryption can beat simply not transmitting that data.

Whenever I see family/friends/co-workers using external drives for "backup" I have to repress the urge to launch into a lecture on the absurdity of relying on a local, always mounted backup.

WesternDigital and all the other purveyors of external hard disks should be ashamed of themselves for promoting their products as a reasonable backup solution. The ONLY kind of calamity that such devices protect you from is accidental deletion or hardware failure. An external drive provides absolutely no protection from any kind of malicious attack or catastrophic disaster (flood, fire, theft). The only real backup solution is an off-site backup. Considering how cheap Amazon S3 is, off-site backups are finally a real solution for the average person.

Apple's Time Machine and Fly Back is a step in the right direction, but without a real off-site backup solution kiss your data goodbye, because when it falls into a river of molten rock, man, it's gone.

Even my near-first-gen netbook has a larger resolution screen than a DVD...

But even if you use the netbook to watch video, many others will not. For me as well as others, the bigger the display the better. Though I have watched videos on my laptop's LCD I much prefer plugging in my 21" external monitor. I am also looking to get a bigger monitor, at least 24" like the HP LP2475w.

Falcon

They could have signed up here, possibly leaving Amazon to only find out after the media started calling.

The terms of service for using Amazon Web Services are pretty broad (which of course is standard CYA for any company hosting third-party content). When terminate-able offenses include "offensive material", you can be sure that "illegally obtained classified material" violates the ToS, regardless of the moral [in]correctness of publishing that information.

(Disclaimer: I'm just speculating here. I do work for Amazon, but I had no knowledge of any of this until Ars Technica's articles on the subject, I have no special knowledge of the situation beyond what is publicly available, and my comments should not be construed as Amazon's official position on anything.)

Why on earth would Amazon offer protection from DDoS in their terms of service? Few companies are stupid enough to offer an SLA dependent on factors outside their control. I can't find evidence that Amazon offers this under any circumstance, let alone "usually". What gave you that idea?

I would think Amazon terminated Wikileaks' service not because of the DDoS, but because Wikileaks violated the Terms of Service. Others have quoted the potentially relevant sections, so I won't repeat them here, but they're not hard to find.

Besides, you're billed by AWS once a month, and Wikileaks was only running on EC2 for a day or two, so most probably billing was not even a factor.

My understanding is that this would not affect results at all. What they are doing is no longer giving points to a site because a negative review linked to that page in the review. Before the change if you wrote a review that said "You should not buy a book from Amazon because their books in particular are absolutely terrible an no one should go there!" Then Amazon's page rank for the keyword "book" would get a bump from the back-link to it. If you think about it this doesn't really make sense as you'd be rewarding Amazon for negative reviews, hence the change.

So writing a site full of negative reviews would cause all the back-links to just get completely ignored and there would be no change to anyone's page rank.

The sad part is, we don't need Wikileaks to know that the Fed should be abolished

http://www.amazon.com/Web-Debt-Ellen-Hodgson-Brown/dp/0979560888/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1291296798&sr=8-1

From the above link:
The Fed makes money ex nihilo, pulling it out of thin air rather than taking it from its coffers. Then, it pushes the money into the economy by buying up assets from banks.

So the banks get all this free money at the same time we talk about "deficit reduction" in the form of extending the retirement age, cutting medicare/medicade benefits and a host of other spending (except wars of course). Maybe if we didn't give the banks free money we would have money for things like health care.

If a site can disrupt such a service, can't they respond to some Govt. agency or a large bank when they want to learn every single information about people buying those "evil" books? Especially people using Kindle? Hell Kindle can even send location data, no super secret tech required.

Who would know? Just look at the amazing amount of tracking data on your link. Not blaming you, it is their dark system which does it.

And after you have cancelled all outstanding orders, close your account to drive home the point.

I did exactly that. It felt good. Some things are still sacred.

And after you have cancelled all outstanding orders, close your account to drive home the point.

The sad part is, we don't need Wikileaks to know that the Fed should be abolished

http://www.amazon.com/Web-Debt-Ellen-Hodgson-Brown/dp/0979560888/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1291296798&sr=8-1

Whether it is a failed educational system or just plain apathy, the Fed really doesn't have to hide that much of what they do. No one seems interested in questioning why a country that has a sovereign right to print money ends up TRILLIONS in debt.

http://www.slate.com/id/2271828/

From the above link: The Fed makes money ex nihilo, pulling it out of thin air rather than taking it from its coffers. Then, it pushes the money into the economy by buying up assets from banks.

So the banks get all this free money at the same time we talk about "deficit reduction" in the form of extending the retirement age, cutting medicare/medicade benefits and a host of other spending (except wars of course). Maybe if we didn't give the banks free money we would have money for things like health care.

... they were taken down for violating Amazon's "Acceptable Use Policy":

http://aws.amazon.com/aup/

No Illegal, Harmful, or Offensive Use or Content

You may not use the Services or AWS Site for any illegal, harmful or offensive use, or to transmit, store, display, distribute or otherwise make available content that is illegal, harmful, or offensive. Prohibited activities or content include:

        * Illegal Activities. Any illegal activities, including advertising, transmitting, or otherwise making available gambling sites or services or disseminating, promoting or facilitating child pornography.
        * Harmful or Fraudulent Activities. Activities that may be harmful to our users, operations, or reputation, including offering or disseminating fraudulent goods, services, schemes, or promotions (e.g., make-money-fast schemes, ponzi and pyramid schemes, phishing, or pharming), or engaging in other deceptive practices.
        * Infringing Content. Content that infringes or misappropriates the intellectual property or proprietary rights of others.
        * Offensive Content. Content that is defamatory, obscene, abusive, invasive of privacy, or otherwise objectionable, including content that constitutes child pornography, relates to bestiality, or depicts non-consensual sex acts.
        * Harmful Content. Content or other computer technology that may damage, interfere with, surreptitiously intercept, or expropriate any system, program, or data, including viruses, Trojan horses, worms, time bombs, or cancelbots.

All attributes marked above could be argued by any of the parties affected by the leaks.

My favorite is "being offensive".
Fuck. I could demand 90% of the Internet to be turned off permanently on account of that alone.
You see, I'm very easily offended by a wide variety of things.

And don't you get me started on otherwise objectionable. Cause... Oh boy...

... And I keep seeing suggestions that their numbers, power, and influence are growing. It's conceivable that they will eventually wield some real power (or you could argue they do already) ...

They already wield a lot of power.

There is not a single openly atheist/agnostic representative in high office in the US. I'm not saying that has anything to do with "The Family", just the nature of politics in the US.

First off, let me remind everyone that cookies left in your browser's cookie cache can only be read by the domain that gave them to you.

Correct so far.

So maps.google.com can read cookies issued by mail.google.com but www.amazon.com cannot read or in any way know about cookies issued from www.newegg.com.

Technically correct, but missing the point. Amazon can know about your activities on newegg.com by buying ads there. (Ok, I don't think newegg.com actually has ads, but let's pretend.) Here's how it works:

1) You visit amazon.com, and they place a cookie in your browser. They associate this cookie with every book you even look at, every item you buy in their marketplace, etc.

2) Amazon puts a couple of ads for the Kindle on newegg.com, in different categories . In those ads are img tags with src like http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=mac, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=amd, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=android, etc.

3) You visit Newegg's site and browse over to the Android tablet department. Your browser loads the ad image -- from Amazon, sending the cookie sent in step 1). They can now add to their extensive profile on you, the fact that you were browsing for an Android Tablet on NewEgg.

This, of course, is a rather benign example, but it illustrates the mechanism by which information you never intended to disclose is gathered by rat-bastard web advertisers. There are far more invasive and nefarious tracking possibilities when Amazon -- or more likely, DoubleClick -- has ads on both, say, a blog site and a pr0n site. "Hmmm, here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 and referer set to cskrat's home page on /., and here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 that come from ads on redheadedsluts.com."

Most people like it when businesses remember them.

I like it when people remember me. I'm on more-or-less equal footing with the bartender who knows what beers I like, or the guy who runs the little martial arts supply store who knows that in my school we train with the three-foot hanbo and not the 4-foot jo.

If those people started deliberately following me around to other businesses, I'd find that very very creepy.

But that has nothing to do with Google, Amazon, etcetera. When powerful immortal sociopaths created by state fiat remember me -- and not only that, but work together to draw up a profile on me -- I have definite cause to get nervous.

First off, let me remind everyone that cookies left in your browser's cookie cache can only be read by the domain that gave them to you.

Correct so far.

So maps.google.com can read cookies issued by mail.google.com but www.amazon.com cannot read or in any way know about cookies issued from www.newegg.com.

Technically correct, but missing the point. Amazon can know about your activities on newegg.com by buying ads there. (Ok, I don't think newegg.com actually has ads, but let's pretend.) Here's how it works:

1) You visit amazon.com, and they place a cookie in your browser. They associate this cookie with every book you even look at, every item you buy in their marketplace, etc.

2) Amazon puts a couple of ads for the Kindle on newegg.com, in different categories . In those ads are img tags with src like http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=mac, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=amd, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=android, etc.

3) You visit Newegg's site and browse over to the Android tablet department. Your browser loads the ad image -- from Amazon, sending the cookie sent in step 1). They can now add to their extensive profile on you, the fact that you were browsing for an Android Tablet on NewEgg.

This, of course, is a rather benign example, but it illustrates the mechanism by which information you never intended to disclose is gathered by rat-bastard web advertisers. There are far more invasive and nefarious tracking possibilities when Amazon -- or more likely, DoubleClick -- has ads on both, say, a blog site and a pr0n site. "Hmmm, here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 and referer set to cskrat's home page on /., and here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 that come from ads on redheadedsluts.com."

Most people like it when businesses remember them.

I like it when people remember me. I'm on more-or-less equal footing with the bartender who knows what beers I like, or the guy who runs the little martial arts supply store who knows that in my school we train with the three-foot hanbo and not the 4-foot jo.

If those people started deliberately following me around to other businesses, I'd find that very very creepy.

But that has nothing to do with Google, Amazon, etcetera. When powerful immortal sociopaths created by state fiat remember me -- and not only that, but work together to draw up a profile on me -- I have definite cause to get nervous.

First off, let me remind everyone that cookies left in your browser's cookie cache can only be read by the domain that gave them to you.

Correct so far.

So maps.google.com can read cookies issued by mail.google.com but www.amazon.com cannot read or in any way know about cookies issued from www.newegg.com.

Technically correct, but missing the point. Amazon can know about your activities on newegg.com by buying ads there. (Ok, I don't think newegg.com actually has ads, but let's pretend.) Here's how it works:

1) You visit amazon.com, and they place a cookie in your browser. They associate this cookie with every book you even look at, every item you buy in their marketplace, etc.

2) Amazon puts a couple of ads for the Kindle on newegg.com, in different categories . In those ads are img tags with src like http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=mac, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=amd, http://ads.amazon.com/ad12345?category=android, etc.

3) You visit Newegg's site and browse over to the Android tablet department. Your browser loads the ad image -- from Amazon, sending the cookie sent in step 1). They can now add to their extensive profile on you, the fact that you were browsing for an Android Tablet on NewEgg.

This, of course, is a rather benign example, but it illustrates the mechanism by which information you never intended to disclose is gathered by rat-bastard web advertisers. There are far more invasive and nefarious tracking possibilities when Amazon -- or more likely, DoubleClick -- has ads on both, say, a blog site and a pr0n site. "Hmmm, here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 and referer set to cskrat's home page on /., and here's a bunch of requests with cookie 7654321 that come from ads on redheadedsluts.com."

Most people like it when businesses remember them.

I like it when people remember me. I'm on more-or-less equal footing with the bartender who knows what beers I like, or the guy who runs the little martial arts supply store who knows that in my school we train with the three-foot hanbo and not the 4-foot jo.

If those people started deliberately following me around to other businesses, I'd find that very very creepy.

But that has nothing to do with Google, Amazon, etcetera. When powerful immortal sociopaths created by state fiat remember me -- and not only that, but work together to draw up a profile on me -- I have definite cause to get nervous.

but this is a violation of due process if not

How would Amazon canceling an account on their own be a violation of due process?

common carrier

Common Carrier has never applied to websites nor ISPs.
Maybe you meant Safe Harbor ? -- which only applies to copyright.

Or maybe Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which only seems to cover civil matters (slander, defamation, etc).
Section 230's coverage is not complete: it excepts federal criminal liability and intellectual property law. 47 U.S.C. 230(e)(1) (criminal) and (e)(2) (intellectual property)

In any case, Amazon choosing not to carry WikiLeaks material is not a violation of Amazon's rights.

From Amazon's ToS:
We may suspend your right and license to use any individual Service or any set of Services, or terminate this Agreement in its entirety [...] if we otherwise determine that your use of the Services or the Amazon Properties [...] may subject us or any third party to liability, damages or danger

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago.

That statement is factually incorrect.

They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

That statement is factually incorrect.

http://www.amazon.com/Brainwave-Greatest-Masterpiece-Science-Grandmaster/dp/0743474864

Sony doesn't need to pay attention, the PS3 is already there.

- Local media: The PS3 can do local media (video/audio/pictures on the HD, or a USB drive).
- Remote Media: The PS3 can act as a DLNA client
- CD/DVD/Blu-Ray: The PS3 has it built in.
- Netflix: Since the last update, the Netflix client is now built into the console.
- Hulu+: The Hulu+ client is available as a free download from the PSN Store (you DO need to have a Hulu+ account with Hulu though). Also, Hulu is still working on expanding the content available on Hulu+ devices versus Hulu, so some things are still missing.
- Vudu: They just added a Vudu client for "Same day as DVD release" Video on Demand.
- Sports: both "MBA.tv" and "NHL Gamecenter LIVE" have Clients (great if you're a sports nut, or married to one)
- VoD: Sony has been working to build out their VoD service. rent/buy TV/Movies (including next day availability of Cable TV shows, and making shows available by Channel to make things easier to find including HBO, Showtime, SyFy, etc.)

Coupled with the increased quality of Over The Air signals since the Digital Switchover, and the need for cable is less and less (depending on how you consume). In a busy city I get at least 10 stations (plus substations), with HD quality reception.

Personally I ditched cable and went with a PS3 and a TiVo.
The TiVo adds an easy to use DVR with a Dual Tuner (record up to two shows at once, while watching a third pre-recorded), includes a Netflix client, is supposed to get a Hulu+ client (according to both Hulu and TiVo), and also includes:
- YouTube client
- Blockbuster Video Client
- Amazon Video On Demand Client
- Pandora Radio Client
- and a few others (I'm getting too tired to list).

=========
For me the cost breakdown was as follows:
Cost:
- Top of the line TiVo with a lifetime subscription runs $500 + $13/month recurring. (gives capacity for ~150 Hours of HD quality recording or >1000 of SD level quality)
- Low end PlayStation 3 runs $300.
- Hulu+ runs $8/month
- Netflix runs $8/month (for streaming only, +$2 to include DVD shipping also)

Total cost:
Initial cost (minus tax, cables, antenna): $800
Recurring month cost: $30

Cable used to run me $130/month (for Cable+Internet), I switched to DSL (~$30/month) and what I listed above, and it dropped my monthly bills by $100 a month (though it takes 8-9 months before the savings kicks in since you're purchasing your own equpiment).
That allows me to get the occasional VoD Movie from Amazon VoD, or purchase a season of a Cable only show or two, and still come out ahead overall (plus I can budget myself and decide if I have the money for it, instead of being hit the cost every month, like it or not, wether I use it or not).
=========

As an added bonus, the PS3 also play games, and the TiVo records other shows constantly once it know what you like, so there is usually SOMETHING you might find interesting, even if it is a rerun of a different show.

You could also throw in a cheaper/cheap DVR if you don't care/want the dual tuners, or NO DVR if its just not feature you're interested in, which drops both the initial cost and the recurring cost quite a bit.

Cable's days (as we know it) are numbered, depending entirely on the Nets ability to absorb the extra use and the Cable Co's willingness to break Net Neutrality.

Um just because an author has titles on amazon isn't exactly a definitive proof that it is under copyright.

I submit Edgar Allen Poe. - 214 titles

http://www.amazon.com/Edgar-Allan-Poe/e/B000APVRP2/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1

The larger issue isn't profitability the issue is accessibility. Still the law is the law. PG shouldn't be breaking the law. However we desperately need copyright reform. Lifetime + 70 is insane. If Disney has its way it will be extended to lifetime+120 in 2034. Then it will be lifetime +200, then lifetime +500, then lifetime + 1000. Essentially public domain will be fixed at items created prior to Disney. The concept of a copyright was never the intent of copyright to provide a infinite supply of revenue from a single work. The idea was to provide ENOUGH protection to encourage people to create works. I find it hard to believe that nobody will write a book, paint a painting, or make a movie unless they have complete control over it for 70 years + their lifetime. I would be willing to wage if copyright was returned to the original 14 years + a single filed 14 year extension we would still see works being created.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

Each of these authors has an Amazon.com home page with at least 50 books in print.

Good luck explaining to a judge and jury how you managed to ignore warning signs as blatant as these:

Poul Anderson 99 titles.

Ray Bradbury 105 titles.

Frederik Pohl 60 titles.

Jack Vance 54 titles.

And a small reminder:

Copyright is a constitutionally protected property right.

Nowhere does it say that a publication has to be profitable to be protected.

You make that argument and Creative Commons, the GPL, etc., goes up in smoke.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

Each of these authors has an Amazon.com home page with at least 50 books in print.

Good luck explaining to a judge and jury how you managed to ignore warning signs as blatant as these:

Poul Anderson 99 titles.

Ray Bradbury 105 titles.

Frederik Pohl 60 titles.

Jack Vance 54 titles.

And a small reminder:

Copyright is a constitutionally protected property right.

Nowhere does it say that a publication has to be profitable to be protected.

You make that argument and Creative Commons, the GPL, etc., goes up in smoke.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

Each of these authors has an Amazon.com home page with at least 50 books in print.

Good luck explaining to a judge and jury how you managed to ignore warning signs as blatant as these:

Poul Anderson 99 titles.

Ray Bradbury 105 titles.

Frederik Pohl 60 titles.

Jack Vance 54 titles.

And a small reminder:

Copyright is a constitutionally protected property right.

Nowhere does it say that a publication has to be profitable to be protected.

You make that argument and Creative Commons, the GPL, etc., goes up in smoke.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

Each of these authors has an Amazon.com home page with at least 50 books in print.

Good luck explaining to a judge and jury how you managed to ignore warning signs as blatant as these:

Poul Anderson 99 titles.

Ray Bradbury 105 titles.

Frederik Pohl 60 titles.

Jack Vance 54 titles.

And a small reminder:

Copyright is a constitutionally protected property right.

Nowhere does it say that a publication has to be profitable to be protected.

You make that argument and Creative Commons, the GPL, etc., goes up in smoke.

Replying to myself, but browsing more has another minor classic--Harry Harrison's Deathworld--also unsurprisingly in print (or at least available new.)

It doesn't look like there's any particular effort been made to filter out in print books. Those two I found by paging through the linked list and glancing at titles--Deathworld and The Big Time--are pretty well known to fans of the period. They don't "slip through" unless there's no thought being put into this. And while Leiber's passed away, Harrison happily has not.

In fact, browsing Wikipedia, it seems he's making a little money off Deathworld as recently as 2007 by 'co-authoring' sequel (excuse my assumption that his name is there more for show than for credit).

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

From Amazon.com:

Poul Anderson
Author Page. 99 books.

Ray Bradbury
Author Page. 105 books.

Frederick Pohl
Author Page. 60 books.

Jack Vance
Author Page. 54 books.

Copyright gives the author - and his heirs - an exclusive and constitutionally protected right to control the distribution and use of his work. No where does it say that those rights are forfeit because his work isn't making any money.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

From Amazon.com:

Poul Anderson
Author Page. 99 books.

Ray Bradbury
Author Page. 105 books.

Frederick Pohl
Author Page. 60 books.

Jack Vance
Author Page. 54 books.

Copyright gives the author - and his heirs - an exclusive and constitutionally protected right to control the distribution and use of his work. No where does it say that those rights are forfeit because his work isn't making any money.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

From Amazon.com:

Poul Anderson
Author Page. 99 books.

Ray Bradbury
Author Page. 105 books.

Frederick Pohl
Author Page. 60 books.

Jack Vance
Author Page. 54 books.

Copyright gives the author - and his heirs - an exclusive and constitutionally protected right to control the distribution and use of his work. No where does it say that those rights are forfeit because his work isn't making any money.

These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.

From Amazon.com:

Poul Anderson
Author Page. 99 books.

Ray Bradbury
Author Page. 105 books.

Frederick Pohl
Author Page. 60 books.

Jack Vance
Author Page. 54 books.

Copyright gives the author - and his heirs - an exclusive and constitutionally protected right to control the distribution and use of his work. No where does it say that those rights are forfeit because his work isn't making any money.