What would be your ideal programming of video content?
I'm not sure.
Would you want adhoc channels put together by others to your tastes? Would you want just one or two key programmes?
Sometimes, I guess. I'm not sure.
How would you want to get your news/weather? What about current affairs/politics?
Unbiased and accurate, I guess. At least I can say that the big problem with news and current affairs coverage is that it's so terribly biased, full of BS and propaganda that it's as good as useless.
Are long running independent serials good, or do you want story arcs?
I reckon most people want long running independent serials, except for the ones that don't.
What place the one-off?
They both have one-offs.
When there are no constraints, what is the best way of getting your interest in content and delivering it?
If I could have my way, I'd have free-to-air TV with a 'skip this crap' button. In all probability I'd be watching TV from 10 years from now, by now.
it's cheaper to use trained humans to assemble low-value products like these
A very interesting observation, in light of the current expose of child labour being used in factories in China. One has to wonder what conditions exist in factories where people don't get guided tours.
'd hate to lose 1/4 of my color resolution *all of the time* to get the added sensitivity that I only need for a small fraction of the shots I take.
To be honest, I wouldn't mind. If you buy a 10 megapixel camera that isn't a good quality SLR, you won't be getting much better quality than a 6 megapixel camera since the bottleneck for quality becomes the lens.
All it would really mean is that we absorb a delay in the relentless rise in pixel density for a dramatic improvement in colour depth.
This technology will sell, there's no doubt about it.
If these small fries (sic) had signed up first. Novel would have known it's a trap and not done the deal. So Novel survives, and all these dumb little you have to buy me Linux distros go bye bye. Somehow the Linux community will survive.
That really does put in doubt the notion of 'divide and conquer' as a way to describe this strategy by Microsoft.
The result will be that we have fewer, bigger distributions - fewer, but probably better choices.
However, this plays into Microsoft's hands. They have hitherto been unable to effectively fight an enemy that has no head office but hundreds of head offices. They want to turn Linux from a community project to a one-or-two company owned product which can then be surrounded and suffocated.
It is a risky way to fight - unite the enemy so you can identify the enemy - but it seems to be a very popular approach lately.
That 74% of war historians think that 26% of war historians have less than 10% of a clue clue about more than 90% of what they are talking about, when it comes to statistics. This assessment of course is subject to adjustment depending on perceived public opinion and verified by use of the retrospectoscope.
She took a bunch of historical information about wars, built a model and then when run on that historical information it was 80% accurate.
Sounds like all those black box stock market predictors to me, none of which are better than a dartboard, but it is very useful for news articles and the media loves numbers like this one: Iraq War has 26% Chance of Success".
However, it's total crap to predict something so complex and varied as a war. Think of the confounding factors! How can there be unbiased inclusion of geographical, political and an infinity of unknowable factors such as which side has the upper hand on intelligence?
How can we assume that future wars will be in any way conventional, or otherwise?
Believing in this stuff makes palm reading look like science.
Indeed you're right - mass media outlets stand to lose a lot if they go after governments. This is proof that they cannot report without fear or favor, wouldn't you agree? I think that journalists are keen to report scandals and sensational political news, because this is a path to promotion, all else being equal. Editors however are keen not to upset their benefactors. Several newspaper editors I have spoken to have recalled occasions when as soon as a news item reached their desk they got a phone call from officials of relevant agencies advising them not to publish the story - I kid you not. I'm sure this doesn't occur all that often, but fear is a big factor in selective publishing.
My feeling is that on certain topics editors are closely watched and stopped before they accidentally publish the wrong thing. Often things get reported in the press only once damage control plans are already in place and the outcome is predetermined. The recent Libby trial and surrounding background stories are a good example of this. Public coverage of the trial was rather uncritical and naive and I think we'll see the topic is shut out now that a single person has been sentenced for what was undoubtedly a crime committed by many.
In no way is this a blanket situation. Many heads roll in government, but history shows that heads of state only fall once their job is done - they are propped up while they serve a purpose.
I've been wandering how the RIAA's actions up to this point were any different from Mafia tactics. Pay us "protection money" or we'll sue. Good on 'em.
And it's no surprise either, since many of the same characters in the RIAA are of the same ilk as the Mafia - perhaps even the direct descendants of Mafia players.
Sadly, though, it's a business model that too often works and the money made from it dwarfs any fines that are imposed afterwards.
It was starting to drag near the middle of last season, I'm glad to see they've identified an endpoint. It'd have been a shame to have to watch that show go into the toilet -- better to burn twice as bright for my viewing amusement. A very good comment, but when I first read it I thought for a second you were referring to the Iraq war.. or maybe the history of the Amiga 500 or something!
How does having my name associated with a file I paid for prevent my friends from playing my purchase? It doesn't, but it means that when someone dies of eating your poisoned apple, they will know it was you.
Unfortunately the Ministry of Education has probably signed a death warrant for the adoption of an open source office package.
Mod parent up!
However, there is a chance that it will not backfire at all. Indeed people can purchase their own office suite, but I have many friends who are using NeoOffice currently for Mac, and for all intents and purposes they have not encountered any problems that have led to complaint. I mean, nobody has lost work or time over the software. Although NeoOffice claims to be immature, it is stable enough for serious work in my experience.
Surely its only a matter of time before Europe imposes trade tariffs on US goods?
Could be. On the other hand a lot of this greenhouse gas emission stuff could well turn out to be a load of hot air. I mean, what with coincidental global warming of the Martian surface due to increased solar radiation and that things like break-away icebergs from polar icecaps being due to factors possibly unrelated to current events (e.g: environmental events which happened centuries ago), the CO2 trade might well turn out to be a bit of a joke.
The unequivocal things are deforestation, acid rain, reduction in light levels by accumulating smog from aircraft, and the health problems that come from having everything made from petrochemicals, but these are all difficult to quantify.
CO2 emissions are quantifiable and people stand to make a lot of money from this game. Any reason for a trade war is a good reason, right?
I did read somewhere that much of the rise in global food prices can be accounted for the use of basic crops such as corn being used to generate biofuels. It seems to me that 'biofuels' are not as comprehensive an answer to the 'peak oil' scare as they look. We might well be robbing Peter to pay Paul in that the expanded cropping needed to cater for the biofuel market will put more pressure for deforestation and other environmental blights.
Hydrogen as a fuel for mass transportation is looking better and better all the time methinks.
Maybe their examples are sensational and selective and biased and possibly totally untrue, but that doesn't change the fact that it's uhm.. entertaining.. like all of news and media!
'Top 25 Things Liberals Want to Whine About This Year'.
Wait until the Liberals get power in the US and we find that the US follows exactly the same foreign policy as it does now. We'll probably find that similar shady operatives like Cheney are behind the Democrats who also have business interests in which similarly tie in with US foreign policy decisions.
Although these stories are used as political ammunition by Democrats, this has nothing to do with them. There actually is no realistic opposition on the political scene to any of these scandals. Both sides of politics are implicated - although to say there are two sides to the political scene in the US is kind of ironic in itself.
It isn't censorship. It's a combination of the apathy and ignorance of viewers, and the apathy and irresponsibility of the media.
That the World Bank funds the Israeli wall is kind of a big one to miss (#9), given that such a wall has nothing to do with helping poverty stricken countries and given that the World Bank has been run by a Republican appointee. That Halliburton sells nuclear tech to Iran (#2) KIND OF means something to people when they choose whether or not to vote Republican next election, given that Cheney is making bucketloads of money from this (#24).
I'm not saying people should vote either way - but these news stories are real scandals that could easily topple governments if they came to the full view of the public.
The issue is that, although more and more of computer literate people can read about this on the net (if they know where to look), politicians choose to ignore anything that isn't on the mainstream media machine. The mainstream media machine is owned and operated by companies who clearly have the power to topple governments (and choose not to do so by underreporting such scandals). This simply shows who plays the tune that politicians dance to.
does it show that their viewing public don't care?
If they don't care about the censored topics as listed in TFA, then presumably the viewing public also don't care about everything else that has been published on those topics. In which case, presumably, nobody is watching the news at all (nor the adverts that go with it). Somehow what you say doesn't make any sense at all.
It's no different from owning any other commercial real estate. The profits are great at the moment, but it can all suddenly turn.
Just as it would be unacceptable for a town to have its main street full of empty shops, so it might be that long-term parked, unused domain names may become an unwanted scenario and fines or increased fees could be imposed.
Not really a very sustainable business model in the long term, methinks.
Does anyone really expect that Microsoft would fund a completely selfless and accurate poll no matter what the subject?
Good point - it's about as reliable as trusting the information on Vioxx as released by the manufacturers. Big oops!
It's just another episode of M$ spitting out whatever propaganda rubbish they can come up with to stave off the rapid loss of interest in their company.
Slashdot Mirror
Better make sure the kids are in bed before you go looking at them, methinks.
I'm not sure.
Would you want adhoc channels put together by others to your tastes? Would you want just one or two key programmes?Sometimes, I guess. I'm not sure.
How would you want to get your news/weather? What about current affairs/politics?Unbiased and accurate, I guess. At least I can say that the big problem with news and current affairs coverage is that it's so terribly biased, full of BS and propaganda that it's as good as useless.
Are long running independent serials good, or do you want story arcs?I reckon most people want long running independent serials, except for the ones that don't.
What place the one-off?They both have one-offs.
When there are no constraints, what is the best way of getting your interest in content and delivering it?If I could have my way, I'd have free-to-air TV with a 'skip this crap' button. In all probability I'd be watching TV from 10 years from now, by now.
A very interesting observation, in light of the current expose of child labour being used in factories in China. One has to wonder what conditions exist in factories where people don't get guided tours.
To be honest, I wouldn't mind. If you buy a 10 megapixel camera that isn't a good quality SLR, you won't be getting much better quality than a 6 megapixel camera since the bottleneck for quality becomes the lens.
All it would really mean is that we absorb a delay in the relentless rise in pixel density for a dramatic improvement in colour depth.
This technology will sell, there's no doubt about it.
That really does put in doubt the notion of 'divide and conquer' as a way to describe this strategy by Microsoft.
The result will be that we have fewer, bigger distributions - fewer, but probably better choices.
However, this plays into Microsoft's hands. They have hitherto been unable to effectively fight an enemy that has no head office but hundreds of head offices. They want to turn Linux from a community project to a one-or-two company owned product which can then be surrounded and suffocated.
It is a risky way to fight - unite the enemy so you can identify the enemy - but it seems to be a very popular approach lately.
Indeed, as my statistical model factors in:
Hmm.. I got a 26% chance of success too. Wow!
That 74% of war historians think that 26% of war historians have less than 10% of a clue clue about more than 90% of what they are talking about, when it comes to statistics. This assessment of course is subject to adjustment depending on perceived public opinion and verified by use of the retrospectoscope.
Sounds like all those black box stock market predictors to me, none of which are better than a dartboard, but it is very useful for news articles and the media loves numbers like this one: Iraq War has 26% Chance of Success".
However, it's total crap to predict something so complex and varied as a war. Think of the confounding factors! How can there be unbiased inclusion of geographical, political and an infinity of unknowable factors such as which side has the upper hand on intelligence?
How can we assume that future wars will be in any way conventional, or otherwise?
Believing in this stuff makes palm reading look like science.
Indeed you're right - mass media outlets stand to lose a lot if they go after governments. This is proof that they cannot report without fear or favor, wouldn't you agree? I think that journalists are keen to report scandals and sensational political news, because this is a path to promotion, all else being equal. Editors however are keen not to upset their benefactors. Several newspaper editors I have spoken to have recalled occasions when as soon as a news item reached their desk they got a phone call from officials of relevant agencies advising them not to publish the story - I kid you not. I'm sure this doesn't occur all that often, but fear is a big factor in selective publishing.
My feeling is that on certain topics editors are closely watched and stopped before they accidentally publish the wrong thing. Often things get reported in the press only once damage control plans are already in place and the outcome is predetermined. The recent Libby trial and surrounding background stories are a good example of this. Public coverage of the trial was rather uncritical and naive and I think we'll see the topic is shut out now that a single person has been sentenced for what was undoubtedly a crime committed by many.
In no way is this a blanket situation. Many heads roll in government, but history shows that heads of state only fall once their job is done - they are propped up while they serve a purpose.
And it's no surprise either, since many of the same characters in the RIAA are of the same ilk as the Mafia - perhaps even the direct descendants of Mafia players.
Sadly, though, it's a business model that too often works and the money made from it dwarfs any fines that are imposed afterwards.
Mod parent up!
However, there is a chance that it will not backfire at all. Indeed people can purchase their own office suite, but I have many friends who are using NeoOffice currently for Mac, and for all intents and purposes they have not encountered any problems that have led to complaint. I mean, nobody has lost work or time over the software. Although NeoOffice claims to be immature, it is stable enough for serious work in my experience.
We had the Cone of Silence years ago. I remember seeing it on telly!
I had to laugh when I read that, because it's true. But perhaps they are quiet on things because the trail of dirt passes through their garden too.
Could be. On the other hand a lot of this greenhouse gas emission stuff could well turn out to be a load of hot air. I mean, what with coincidental global warming of the Martian surface due to increased solar radiation and that things like break-away icebergs from polar icecaps being due to factors possibly unrelated to current events (e.g: environmental events which happened centuries ago), the CO2 trade might well turn out to be a bit of a joke.
The unequivocal things are deforestation, acid rain, reduction in light levels by accumulating smog from aircraft, and the health problems that come from having everything made from petrochemicals, but these are all difficult to quantify.
CO2 emissions are quantifiable and people stand to make a lot of money from this game. Any reason for a trade war is a good reason, right?
I did read somewhere that much of the rise in global food prices can be accounted for the use of basic crops such as corn being used to generate biofuels. It seems to me that 'biofuels' are not as comprehensive an answer to the 'peak oil' scare as they look. We might well be robbing Peter to pay Paul in that the expanded cropping needed to cater for the biofuel market will put more pressure for deforestation and other environmental blights.
Hydrogen as a fuel for mass transportation is looking better and better all the time methinks.
Maybe their examples are sensational and selective and biased and possibly totally untrue, but that doesn't change the fact that it's uhm.. entertaining.. like all of news and media!
Wait until the Liberals get power in the US and we find that the US follows exactly the same foreign policy as it does now. We'll probably find that similar shady operatives like Cheney are behind the Democrats who also have business interests in which similarly tie in with US foreign policy decisions.
Although these stories are used as political ammunition by Democrats, this has nothing to do with them. There actually is no realistic opposition on the political scene to any of these scandals. Both sides of politics are implicated - although to say there are two sides to the political scene in the US is kind of ironic in itself.
That the World Bank funds the Israeli wall is kind of a big one to miss (#9), given that such a wall has nothing to do with helping poverty stricken countries and given that the World Bank has been run by a Republican appointee. That Halliburton sells nuclear tech to Iran (#2) KIND OF means something to people when they choose whether or not to vote Republican next election, given that Cheney is making bucketloads of money from this (#24).
I'm not saying people should vote either way - but these news stories are real scandals that could easily topple governments if they came to the full view of the public.
The issue is that, although more and more of computer literate people can read about this on the net (if they know where to look), politicians choose to ignore anything that isn't on the mainstream media machine. The mainstream media machine is owned and operated by companies who clearly have the power to topple governments (and choose not to do so by underreporting such scandals). This simply shows who plays the tune that politicians dance to.
If they don't care about the censored topics as listed in TFA, then presumably the viewing public also don't care about everything else that has been published on those topics. In which case, presumably, nobody is watching the news at all (nor the adverts that go with it). Somehow what you say doesn't make any sense at all.
It must be made for very clean, fresh, practically virginal apples.
It's no different from owning any other commercial real estate. The profits are great at the moment, but it can all suddenly turn.
Just as it would be unacceptable for a town to have its main street full of empty shops, so it might be that long-term parked, unused domain names may become an unwanted scenario and fines or increased fees could be imposed.
Not really a very sustainable business model in the long term, methinks.
Good point - it's about as reliable as trusting the information on Vioxx as released by the manufacturers. Big oops!
It's just another episode of M$ spitting out whatever propaganda rubbish they can come up with to stave off the rapid loss of interest in their company.