Regarding the map update links, is there any reason to bother submitting new/updated street data? The only benefit is to Nokia and Tom-tom, both large publicly traded companies. Their proprietary datasets costs tens of thousands of dollars to license and you're saving them money in physical mapping costs while getting nothing in return.
It's not like the updates benefit a publicly accessible database like Tiger or Openstreetmap.
As a casual gamer, I don't necessarily mind that gameplay isn't progressing that fast. The problem in my mind is the price. There are many "non-blockbuster" games on Steam that I've come close to purchasing but decided not to at the last minute. Around $20 would be get me to complete the transaction. $40-$50 always seems to break the deal. There would probably be 15 games in my online account instead of two if the price was lower.
The decision isn't due to factors like the delivery method; whether the online content is cheaper than a physical DVD doesn't matter, imho. And if development costs are so high that the producer needs to charge that much, well, then the whole issue is simply just my problem/loss.
So the point is that for some folks, content isn't the only deal-breaker in a game's success. Product pricing is a major factor too.
A complete switch to digital will likely cause the TV stations to permanently lose a lot of viewers
Not sure I can envision your scenario happening. When the time comes, Walmart and every other retailer will be advertising cheap digital sets like crazy. People will be lining up for the sales then trampling over each other to make sure they get one before they sell out (and of course to get the best price).
Ok, granted that's pure conjecture just as your supposition about losing viewers is. It just seems that even lower income households in this country have enough disposable income to afford a cheap set. A TV is a pretty mandatory item in most homes and lots of folks will be exposed to the massive marketing campaign when the time comes and will make the transition.
I'd propose that the "shut off the TV and read a book" crowd comprises a very small segment of Americans.
I think most of us have seen this scenario enough to say...because then there would be no reason for Joe Sixpacks to buy a new machine when theirs "breaks". Of course it will be a brand new machine with "the most secure OS ever released (by Microsoft)".
And what's especially odd is that you don't often see a mainstream article about viruses stating that it affects Microsoft OSs exclusively. Because of the monopoly, people associate their computer with Windows. So it would make sense then that the brand would suffer damage. But it doesn't because it's always the evil hackers.
Yesterday my sixpack neighbor asked me why do people keep breaking his computer. He bought a new Dell last week because the old one was unusable due to the "popups" (spambot obviously). I'm tired of explaining it and this time didn't even bother making a car analogy.
Seriously, this sounds like tin foil hat territory but is it really? Would you handle it differently if you were in their shoes and relied on OS revenue?
I wouldn't. If the method works, don't break it by fixing it.
This snippet from the FAQ is probably worth posting for others that run into this issue (before posting on Digg or Slashdot). Note the last paragraph, emphasis mine:
"How can I help gpl-violations.org ?
Firstly by not reacting to a technical GPL violation in an extreme fashion. Secondly by checking the violation is indeed a violation.
Join the mailing lists, discuss issues there first. Be polite but firm when dealing with companies and remember that the goal is to ensure a company stops violating the GPL and does not violate it again, rather than to leave a smoking crater at the location of their HQ... at least not on the first offence.
Keep records of conversations with companies. Co-ordinate with others. A company faced with eight different stories will find it hard to deal with. A company faced with a single accurate information source can respond better.
Beware the "public shaming" bomb. It's easy to let off, but very hard to defuse if you made a mistake or the issue turned out to be minor and is rapidly resolved. In addition companies may become very defensive in such cases and decide to "tough it out". We want to build bridges and giving a company no way to avoid losing face hinders that, especially in certain cultures."
Or could it be a very shy but voluptuously stacked and horny blonde slashdotter trying to get your attention for a wild one night stand of anonymous hot steamy sex?
Those are the *exact* two symptoms I'm experiencing except using XP. However, after some googling I wrote the experience off to the fact that I'm running an X800 card. According to some posts there's no way to use it because it doesn't support pixel shader 3.0.
If it's not due to that it would be worth another try. Any input appreciated.
Good points. I take it a step further and say it's a civic duty to fellow netizens to recommend the good sites you've found. Especially to your Joe Sixpack friends so they don't get sucked in by the deceptive crap.
Btw, if most are like me, product decisions are usually based on other user's feedback as opposed to formally published reviews. Here's my "Top 10 List" contribution of sites in that vein:
1) Online stores: www.resellerratings.com 2) A/V: www.avsforum.com 3) Hosting: www.webhostingtalk.com 4) General product reviews: www.amazon.com (yeah, really) 5) Hardware: www.newegg.com 5) Anything CD/DVD related: www.cdfreaks.com 6) ATI: www.rage3d.com 7) Nvidia: www.nvnews.net 8) Storage (forums mainly): www.storagereview.com 9) Just plain interesting and informative threads: www.arstechnica.com (anyone remember the endless, very informative Dell 2000FP thread?) 10) Opinions on Microsoft: www.slashdot.org
its lawyers' failure to respond to Ms. Foster's lawyer's email
It's interesting that email is stated specifically. Is it legally acceptable these days to use email for important correspondence? If so, given the number of possible failure modes between sender and receiver, how can it be compared to mature methods of communication like fax and registered mail?
Ok, then I'm really missing something. Comprehensive business databases have been around forever (like InfoUSA or D&B) and can be licensed for comparatively little (compared to Google's scale). They're compiled and constantly updated from state databases. By definition, if a business is legal then it means that a tax ID and unemployment number has been assigned so it will definitely be in there. Maybe I'm not reading it right, are you saying that Google is trying to build theirs from the ground up through this program?
It's not spelled out, but from reading the Business Referral page I thought they're trying to enhance the existing business database by including information that is not usually there when searching. Stuff like business hours, pictures, etc. thereby expanding the content. This would have the effect of getting people in the habit of using Google when looking for local information in the future since it's that much better than the competitors.
It seems like it should be the other way around. Design a web interface and supporting middleware to a database of the x million businesses Google compiles. If the college student wants to participate and they live in the geographic area, they'd sign up and "check out" a maximum of 5 or so businesses at a time. "Check out" meaning a couple fields in each business's record gets flagged and timestamped like a library book.
If you don't do the job within a day or two, the records get reset and the next lucky college student can check them out. Upon completion, Google's happy and the college student is definitely happy. The business is (presumably) happy because they got new advertising exposure on the interweb for free and they didn't get bugged to hell. And there's really no way to "hijack" a bounty since if you didn't check it out then you don't get paid. It seems this would alleviate the obvious problems you described very well.
Having said all that, realistically Google already thought of this process and rejected it. So what's wrong with it?
Each Tuesday morning everyone in our office kneels, faces west and screams "Blessed Be Ballmer!" repeatedly. We know He's listening because sometimes the angels reward us with a little icon in our trays.
We tried it once with the Ubuntu god but it just felt blasphemous and unclean.
Well, the obvious analog to your story is Head On. IANAMarketingWeenie, but it seems like if you want to integrate "annoying" into your marketing strategy, it needs to be done very carefully. The marketing jingles for the radio station may have been too long and distracting to parse the core concept. So perhaps the method works if a) it's repetitive and b) what's repeated is only the key statement (product name, motto, etc.).
From Head On in Wiki: "The company used focus groups to try a number of potential commercials, with one focused solely on repetition; the focus groups recalled the ads much more than with any other method.[1] Many people consider the ads annoying.[4][5][6] Dan Charron, vice president of sales and marketing, told the Los Angeles Times that nobody in the focus groups had told him that the ads were annoying.[2]"
It's hard to believe that they didn't know it was annoying and went with the campaign anyway. Surely there was some overwhelming result from the data that said, "Yeah, this combination is the key to getting our brand name to stick." Not sure what the desired spin is with the vice president's statement but it's a safe bet that if you can get rich from people rubbing wax on their forehead for no reason, you're doing something right.
Slashdot Mirror
Regarding the map update links, is there any reason to bother submitting new/updated street data? The only benefit is to Nokia and Tom-tom, both large publicly traded companies. Their proprietary datasets costs tens of thousands of dollars to license and you're saving them money in physical mapping costs while getting nothing in return.
It's not like the updates benefit a publicly accessible database like Tiger or Openstreetmap.
Feel free to pop in any time you like.
I did the same thing except with Gilbert Godfried's voice.
You definitely made the better choice.
As a casual gamer, I don't necessarily mind that gameplay isn't progressing that fast. The problem in my mind is the price. There are many "non-blockbuster" games on Steam that I've come close to purchasing but decided not to at the last minute. Around $20 would be get me to complete the transaction. $40-$50 always seems to break the deal. There would probably be 15 games in my online account instead of two if the price was lower.
The decision isn't due to factors like the delivery method; whether the online content is cheaper than a physical DVD doesn't matter, imho. And if development costs are so high that the producer needs to charge that much, well, then the whole issue is simply just my problem/loss.
So the point is that for some folks, content isn't the only deal-breaker in a game's success. Product pricing is a major factor too.
If you heard it ring, would you do anything about it? ;)
A complete switch to digital will likely cause the TV stations to permanently lose a lot of viewers
Not sure I can envision your scenario happening. When the time comes, Walmart and every other retailer will be advertising cheap digital sets like crazy. People will be lining up for the sales then trampling over each other to make sure they get one before they sell out (and of course to get the best price).
Ok, granted that's pure conjecture just as your supposition about losing viewers is. It just seems that even lower income households in this country have enough disposable income to afford a cheap set. A TV is a pretty mandatory item in most homes and lots of folks will be exposed to the massive marketing campaign when the time comes and will make the transition.
I'd propose that the "shut off the TV and read a book" crowd comprises a very small segment of Americans.
Kind of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Like_Chinese
Google for the lyrics/song but be forewarned...it's catchy. You'll be humming it all week long.
I think most of us have seen this scenario enough to say...because then there would be no reason for Joe Sixpacks to buy a new machine when theirs "breaks". Of course it will be a brand new machine with "the most secure OS ever released (by Microsoft)".
And what's especially odd is that you don't often see a mainstream article about viruses stating that it affects Microsoft OSs exclusively. Because of the monopoly, people associate their computer with Windows. So it would make sense then that the brand would suffer damage. But it doesn't because it's always the evil hackers.
Yesterday my sixpack neighbor asked me why do people keep breaking his computer. He bought a new Dell last week because the old one was unusable due to the "popups" (spambot obviously). I'm tired of explaining it and this time didn't even bother making a car analogy.
Seriously, this sounds like tin foil hat territory but is it really? Would you handle it differently if you were in their shoes and relied on OS revenue?
I wouldn't. If the method works, don't break it by fixing it.
Because I'm using an Opteron!
I'll bet it checks off "post anonymously" even better than an Intel too!
This snippet from the FAQ is probably worth posting for others that run into this issue (before posting on Digg or Slashdot). Note the last paragraph, emphasis mine:
"How can I help gpl-violations.org ?
Firstly by not reacting to a technical GPL violation in an extreme fashion. Secondly by checking the violation is indeed a violation.
Join the mailing lists, discuss issues there first. Be polite but firm when dealing with companies and remember that the goal is to ensure a company stops violating the GPL and does not violate it again, rather than to leave a smoking crater at the location of their HQ... at least not on the first offence.
Keep records of conversations with companies. Co-ordinate with others. A company faced with eight different stories will find it hard to deal with. A company faced with a single accurate information source can respond better.
Beware the "public shaming" bomb. It's easy to let off, but very hard to defuse if you made a mistake or the issue turned out to be minor and is rapidly resolved. In addition companies may become very defensive in such cases and decide to "tough it out". We want to build bridges and giving a company no way to avoid losing face hinders that, especially in certain cultures."
Never was there a greater need for an edit button after submit.
Been there myself...
Anyone else think that these pro-MS trolls are getting as boring and unoriginal as the anti-MS trolls? How about something fresh and original?
Innovate people, innovate.
Surprisingly, www.teenvervetmonkeyporn.com is still available.
Or could it be a very shy but voluptuously stacked and horny blonde slashdotter trying to get your attention for a wild one night stand of anonymous hot steamy sex?
Or not.
Those are the *exact* two symptoms I'm experiencing except using XP. However, after some googling I wrote the experience off to the fact that I'm running an X800 card. According to some posts there's no way to use it because it doesn't support pixel shader 3.0.
If it's not due to that it would be worth another try. Any input appreciated.
Or at least enter it as a "Top 5 Slashdot Utility":
#include <iostream>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
std::cout << "Frist Ps0t sucker HOs!!1!!!" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Good points. I take it a step further and say it's a civic duty to fellow netizens to recommend the good sites you've found. Especially to your Joe Sixpack friends so they don't get sucked in by the deceptive crap.
Btw, if most are like me, product decisions are usually based on other user's feedback as opposed to formally published reviews. Here's my "Top 10 List" contribution of sites in that vein:
1) Online stores: www.resellerratings.com
2) A/V: www.avsforum.com
3) Hosting: www.webhostingtalk.com
4) General product reviews: www.amazon.com (yeah, really)
5) Hardware: www.newegg.com
5) Anything CD/DVD related: www.cdfreaks.com
6) ATI: www.rage3d.com
7) Nvidia: www.nvnews.net
8) Storage (forums mainly): www.storagereview.com
9) Just plain interesting and informative threads: www.arstechnica.com (anyone remember the endless, very informative Dell 2000FP thread?)
10) Opinions on Microsoft: www.slashdot.org
FWIW, YMMV.
its lawyers' failure to respond to Ms. Foster's lawyer's email
It's interesting that email is stated specifically. Is it legally acceptable these days to use email for important correspondence? If so, given the number of possible failure modes between sender and receiver, how can it be compared to mature methods of communication like fax and registered mail?
Any IAALs out there?
Ok, then I'm really missing something. Comprehensive business databases have been around forever (like InfoUSA or D&B) and can be licensed for comparatively little (compared to Google's scale). They're compiled and constantly updated from state databases. By definition, if a business is legal then it means that a tax ID and unemployment number has been assigned so it will definitely be in there. Maybe I'm not reading it right, are you saying that Google is trying to build theirs from the ground up through this program?
It's not spelled out, but from reading the Business Referral page I thought they're trying to enhance the existing business database by including information that is not usually there when searching. Stuff like business hours, pictures, etc. thereby expanding the content. This would have the effect of getting people in the habit of using Google when looking for local information in the future since it's that much better than the competitors.
No?
It seems like it should be the other way around. Design a web interface and supporting middleware to a database of the x million businesses Google compiles. If the college student wants to participate and they live in the geographic area, they'd sign up and "check out" a maximum of 5 or so businesses at a time. "Check out" meaning a couple fields in each business's record gets flagged and timestamped like a library book.
If you don't do the job within a day or two, the records get reset and the next lucky college student can check them out. Upon completion, Google's happy and the college student is definitely happy. The business is (presumably) happy because they got new advertising exposure on the interweb for free and they didn't get bugged to hell. And there's really no way to "hijack" a bounty since if you didn't check it out then you don't get paid. It seems this would alleviate the obvious problems you described very well.
Having said all that, realistically Google already thought of this process and rejected it. So what's wrong with it?
Each Tuesday morning everyone in our office kneels, faces west and screams "Blessed Be Ballmer!" repeatedly. We know He's listening because sometimes the angels reward us with a little icon in our trays.
We tried it once with the Ubuntu god but it just felt blasphemous and unclean.
The researchers just need to look for Norway further up the river.
Just curious, anyone have a link to a list or interview containing this quote? Google indexed a number of sigs, but not a published source.
Well, the obvious analog to your story is Head On. IANAMarketingWeenie, but it seems like if you want to integrate "annoying" into your marketing strategy, it needs to be done very carefully. The marketing jingles for the radio station may have been too long and distracting to parse the core concept. So perhaps the method works if a) it's repetitive and b) what's repeated is only the key statement (product name, motto, etc.).
From Head On in Wiki:
"The company used focus groups to try a number of potential commercials, with one focused solely on repetition; the focus groups recalled the ads much more than with any other method.[1] Many people consider the ads annoying.[4][5][6] Dan Charron, vice president of sales and marketing, told the Los Angeles Times that nobody in the focus groups had told him that the ads were annoying.[2]"
It's hard to believe that they didn't know it was annoying and went with the campaign anyway. Surely there was some overwhelming result from the data that said, "Yeah, this combination is the key to getting our brand name to stick." Not sure what the desired spin is with the vice president's statement but it's a safe bet that if you can get rich from people rubbing wax on their forehead for no reason, you're doing something right.
I am a physicist, but these subjects are often beyond me. Still, let me try a short explanation.
That's fine. The non-physicists here will gleefully take up the slack.