I think this whole (stupid) argument you guys are having brings to light the real issue...whenever there's a demand for something, the market will take care of it.
After reading this thread, it seems people are unhappy about Blockbuster late fees. However, I have a Blockbuster account, and there are NO late fees. Is this a typical case of slashdot over-reaction, or was there something in the past were Blockbuster was bilking people with late fees, then they dropped late fees as a PR move? I ask seriously because I've only been back in the United States for a couple of years, and they've always had a no late fee policy.
Just curious...what kind of "service" are you looking for from the equivalent of a convenience store? You go in, you pick your movie, you check out. If you are like me, you maybe say three or four words to the clerk and then you are on your way.
And pray tell, how hard up are you if you have to rent movies in between Netflix deliveries? I get my next Netflix video the day after I drop the last one off.
I don't agree with the last part of the summary saying the cable companies are going the same way as Blockbuster.
The cable companies MIGHT go the same was as Blockbuster if the cable companies had a serious competitor like RedBox or Netflix. As far as I can tell, there is no alternative (especially for niche interests like mine...soccer, racing, BBC). Sure you can get tv content from online sources, but can I watch Texas vs. UCLA this weekend without a cable subscription? How about Oregon vs. Arizona State? What about the Singapore Grand Prix? How about some English Premiere League soccer or the CONCACAF matches?
And even if I could get this content that I want on-demand, cheaply and easily, how do I get it to my TV with surround sound? So far none of the alternatives has solved this issue for me.
I pay more in Netflix subscriptions and not watching the two movies I have checked out for several weeks than I ever do in late fees. That's the ONE reason I still have a blockbuster account. For those rare nights that I know I can sit down for a 2 hour block, watch the movie, and return it on my way to work the next day.
I think late fees get a bad rap, especially if you are a modest movie watcher (i.e. have a job, family, life). The way I look at it is if I have one or two $5 late fees a quarter at Blockbuster, that's still less than the $12 a month that I have the same two Netflix movies checked out. I know it's my fault, but I think it's a pretty realistic scenario for most normal people.
As long as their are old fashioned dudes like me who buy houses based on the ease of setting up surround sound, AND on-demand services such as Netflix have lower quality (especially in the audio)than a Blu-ray disk, then physical media will reign.
Personally I wouldn't ever touch another disk again if I could just get an on-demand service that had full HD with full surround. Maybe there's a service out there, but it ain't Netflix (the streaming doesn't stream a surround signal, nor is the video anywhere near even 720p) and it ain't my cable-company (only have the last 6 episodes and $5.99 for one movie is not realistic, when I already have Netflix).
Due to zoning, sprawl, real estate pricing, etc. here in the US, nearly EVERYONE must drive to a super market.
Outside of a few urban areas, most US cities don't have super markets in their areas that are zoned for housing. And unlike England where I could walk to the street corner co-op, we have crappy "convenience" stores which don't sell things that a coop does (like food for a full meal).
You can get from any city to any other city in less than a day in the UK. Not so much in the US.
I was astonished that when we moved back to the US from way up north in England (North Yorkshire), the moving company that was contracted came up from London to take our stuff to the port.
I lived in England, and being American, opted for living arrangements like I'm used to in the US. That is to say we had a big house out in the country and opted to drive into Harrogate. The MAIN problem with applying this US-centric mentality to living in Europe is not gas prices (although they are shocking at first) and not the commute, but what to do when you get to your destination. Parking is a serious problem (and seriously expensive).
So it isn't congestion, crappy roads, or expensive gas that made commuting a pain in the ass, it was the lack of parking. When we went to Cambridge, they had an elegant solution of parking on the outskirts then riding a bus into town.
It also highlights that working from home can increase home energy use by as much as 30 per cent, and can lead to people moving further from the workplace, stretching urban sprawl and increasing pollution.
Err, if I work from home, why does being "further from the workplace" matter? Seriously, this is WHY I live so damned far away from downtown Austin. I can get a giant cheap house 30 miles away from downtown. Even when I do have to go into town, the cost savings from my mortgage alone offset any transportation costs.
I see it as two half trips (meeting in the middle). I drive to the store where my goods were delivered, and the delivery guy doesn't have to come to my house.
Exactly. Either way, the book I buy from Amazon gets shipped to my house from a warehouse and a UPS distro center, or it gets shipped to a store then I drive to the store to pick it up. Environmental impact is the same.
What if, like me, you ARE the boss? The only reason I 'have' to come into the office is to check up on my workers? I can do that from home, while they work from home. I can tell by their production if they are being, well, productive.
Wait...a company (Google) that makes a profit by selling stuff (advertisements) has introduced a technology that enables them to sell more ads? Unpossible!
Obviously you can still text if you don't pay that, it will just cost you 10p per text (or whatever it is in America, 25c I seem to recall?).
Obviously you can't, if you live in the US and have AT&T. Here in BigCorporate America, AT&T has the gall to charge $5 a month for TWENTY texts, then everything after that is.25 cents. If you opt NOT to pay the $5 a month, you get NO TEXTING.
Unlimited texting is $20 a month, putting me in the odd guessing game if I'm going to send more than 20 texts, but less than $20 worth at.25 cents per text over the first 20 for the month, or just going for the convenience and overpaying at $20 a month for something I most likely won't use.
So to summarize:
AT&T charges $5/month for 20 texts, then.25 cents per text after that
Hmmm. I had to pay EXTRA for my phone plan to get texting. Even with Data and Voice, the phone companies have found a way to bill more for texting.
If I dropped texting it would cost me $5/month less. That is NOT cheaper.
Maybe you mean it is CHEAPER in Europe (it is in some cases in England at least). But it's not cheap enough for functioning adults who have real jobs to really care. None of my professional coworkers fretted about their voice minutes being used up, nor did they ever feel the need to send a text to save some voice minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this whole (stupid) argument you guys are having brings to light the real issue...whenever there's a demand for something, the market will take care of it.
Let's not jump to conclusions. Bankruptcy proceedings don't mean Blockbuster is out of business (yet).
After reading this thread, it seems people are unhappy about Blockbuster late fees. However, I have a Blockbuster account, and there are NO late fees. Is this a typical case of slashdot over-reaction, or was there something in the past were Blockbuster was bilking people with late fees, then they dropped late fees as a PR move? I ask seriously because I've only been back in the United States for a couple of years, and they've always had a no late fee policy.
It only works if you're large enough to get legislation passed to protect the old ways. (MPAA/RIAA)
Large enough like the handful of cable companies that control the entire United States?
Just curious...what kind of "service" are you looking for from the equivalent of a convenience store? You go in, you pick your movie, you check out. If you are like me, you maybe say three or four words to the clerk and then you are on your way.
And pray tell, how hard up are you if you have to rent movies in between Netflix deliveries? I get my next Netflix video the day after I drop the last one off.
Don't let facts get in your way. The $700 billion bailout was a Bush policy.
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-09-24/politics/bush.bailout_1_bailout-proposal-rescue-plan-mortgage-related-securities?_s=PM:POLITICS
They are not "gone". They filed for bankruptcy which is something totally different.
I don't agree with the last part of the summary saying the cable companies are going the same way as Blockbuster.
The cable companies MIGHT go the same was as Blockbuster if the cable companies had a serious competitor like RedBox or Netflix. As far as I can tell, there is no alternative (especially for niche interests like mine...soccer, racing, BBC). Sure you can get tv content from online sources, but can I watch Texas vs. UCLA this weekend without a cable subscription? How about Oregon vs. Arizona State? What about the Singapore Grand Prix? How about some English Premiere League soccer or the CONCACAF matches?
And even if I could get this content that I want on-demand, cheaply and easily, how do I get it to my TV with surround sound? So far none of the alternatives has solved this issue for me.
I pay more in Netflix subscriptions and not watching the two movies I have checked out for several weeks than I ever do in late fees. That's the ONE reason I still have a blockbuster account. For those rare nights that I know I can sit down for a 2 hour block, watch the movie, and return it on my way to work the next day.
I think late fees get a bad rap, especially if you are a modest movie watcher (i.e. have a job, family, life). The way I look at it is if I have one or two $5 late fees a quarter at Blockbuster, that's still less than the $12 a month that I have the same two Netflix movies checked out. I know it's my fault, but I think it's a pretty realistic scenario for most normal people.
As long as their are old fashioned dudes like me who buy houses based on the ease of setting up surround sound, AND on-demand services such as Netflix have lower quality (especially in the audio)than a Blu-ray disk, then physical media will reign.
Personally I wouldn't ever touch another disk again if I could just get an on-demand service that had full HD with full surround. Maybe there's a service out there, but it ain't Netflix (the streaming doesn't stream a surround signal, nor is the video anywhere near even 720p) and it ain't my cable-company (only have the last 6 episodes and $5.99 for one movie is not realistic, when I already have Netflix).
Due to zoning, sprawl, real estate pricing, etc. here in the US, nearly EVERYONE must drive to a super market.
Outside of a few urban areas, most US cities don't have super markets in their areas that are zoned for housing. And unlike England where I could walk to the street corner co-op, we have crappy "convenience" stores which don't sell things that a coop does (like food for a full meal).
You can get from any city to any other city in less than a day in the UK. Not so much in the US.
I was astonished that when we moved back to the US from way up north in England (North Yorkshire), the moving company that was contracted came up from London to take our stuff to the port.
I lived in England, and being American, opted for living arrangements like I'm used to in the US. That is to say we had a big house out in the country and opted to drive into Harrogate. The MAIN problem with applying this US-centric mentality to living in Europe is not gas prices (although they are shocking at first) and not the commute, but what to do when you get to your destination. Parking is a serious problem (and seriously expensive).
So it isn't congestion, crappy roads, or expensive gas that made commuting a pain in the ass, it was the lack of parking. When we went to Cambridge, they had an elegant solution of parking on the outskirts then riding a bus into town.
For instance:
Err, if I work from home, why does being "further from the workplace" matter? Seriously, this is WHY I live so damned far away from downtown Austin. I can get a giant cheap house 30 miles away from downtown. Even when I do have to go into town, the cost savings from my mortgage alone offset any transportation costs.
Two trips or one.....take your pick....
I see it as two half trips (meeting in the middle). I drive to the store where my goods were delivered, and the delivery guy doesn't have to come to my house.
Exactly. Either way, the book I buy from Amazon gets shipped to my house from a warehouse and a UPS distro center, or it gets shipped to a store then I drive to the store to pick it up. Environmental impact is the same.
What if, like me, you ARE the boss? The only reason I 'have' to come into the office is to check up on my workers? I can do that from home, while they work from home. I can tell by their production if they are being, well, productive.
Nerds use boxen to prove their nerd-cred. Calling your computer a "box" is nerdy enough for most non-nerds.
Advertising is not just an "arm" of Google. It IS Google.
Wait...a company (Google) that makes a profit by selling stuff (advertisements) has introduced a technology that enables them to sell more ads? Unpossible!
Yes, totally true and totally crazy. Yet the market is driven by demand, and enough people don't seem to mind.
Obviously you can still text if you don't pay that, it will just cost you 10p per text (or whatever it is in America, 25c I seem to recall?).
Obviously you can't, if you live in the US and have AT&T. Here in BigCorporate America, AT&T has the gall to charge $5 a month for TWENTY texts, then everything after that is .25 cents. If you opt NOT to pay the $5 a month, you get NO TEXTING.
Unlimited texting is $20 a month, putting me in the odd guessing game if I'm going to send more than 20 texts, but less than $20 worth at .25 cents per text over the first 20 for the month, or just going for the convenience and overpaying at $20 a month for something I most likely won't use.
So to summarize:
In SMS Shorthand:
fst = first, fast?
pst = post, past, pest?
Frosty Piss?
(note: I have no idea what frosty piss is, but I see it so often on here, that I thought it would be good for a +1 funny, at least).
It's easy to conduct 3 chats and 2 AIM conversations when the communication involved is so utterly devoid of meaningful content.
It's cheaper.
Hmmm. I had to pay EXTRA for my phone plan to get texting. Even with Data and Voice, the phone companies have found a way to bill more for texting.
If I dropped texting it would cost me $5/month less. That is NOT cheaper.
Maybe you mean it is CHEAPER in Europe (it is in some cases in England at least). But it's not cheap enough for functioning adults who have real jobs to really care. None of my professional coworkers fretted about their voice minutes being used up, nor did they ever feel the need to send a text to save some voice minutes.