You seriously expect people to cancel their account because part of a new series was leaked (an account they will need the account for to finish watching)?
I would think so, in that people could unsub until the new episodes came out, but Netflix works on a "release all at once" model. So the last episode of the season comes out the same day as the first. And you don't pay per episode, so the cost to get just the final few episodes is the same as the cost to get the entire series, and it all happens at the same time.
The only people who this lost-subscriber theory might apply to are the folks who would have watched the first few episodes and thought "well this sucks now, I don't need to see the rest." Unsubscribing based just on the first few episodes of the new season. I would think that group would be fairly small.
Netflix was the rare bird who gave great content at a reasonable price.
Which is one of the reasons why the studios have tried so very hard to kill Netflix. They were quite open and vocal about their belief that Netflix's model absolutely screwed them over in the DVD era. Before streaming, everyone loved Netflix and you could get an amazing variety of things at a reasonable price, all in one place. But again, the studios HATED the fact that Netflix didn't charge premium prices for "premium" titles, they hated the fact that it was not pay-per-view, they hated the fact that rentals took away from their DVD sales numbers. They never forgave Netflix, and now that streaming puts the power back into studio hands, they are doing their best to cut off Netflix's oxygen supply.
Now that the studios can dictate who can stream, how, and with what prices, we see exorbitant prices, pay per view, many many services all with their own content, and nothing resembling anything like Netflix from the old days -- one-stop shopping for a reasonable price. And people wonder why old fogies like myself think streaming sucks compared to what we used to be able to get.
Same as Apple did when they started selling songs online, when the music industry was still very much used to the album model.
The movie industry learned a bit of a lesson from the music industry, and have made sure that they're not beholden to any particular service like the music industry became to Apple. The streaming choices are all very fractured, no particular company can claim dominance, and the movie studios seem like they're totally ok with totally withholding some content from the streaming world entirely, and withholding other content for anything other than an exorbitant price and locked-in DRM.
Yes, most users want a secure solution. The problem with pointing to walled gardens is most users don't even have a clue what the term "walled garden" even means, so they sure as hell aren't buying hardware because of it. They're choosing solutions because they're easier to use.
For most people, computers are a curious tool, but they are NOT worth investing time into just to make them work properly. They want something that is simple and easy while doing what they want.
Neither the summary, nor the original article mentioned Ghostbusters (2016). The article specifically mentions: The cascade effect can help explain why great movies such as The Wizard of Oz or Heathers can flop at the box office, while terrible movies such as Hangover III rake in millions.
Ghostbusters might be an interesting example because it got a huge amount of bad buzz, even though almost none of the people who "hated it" had seen anything from it before it's release. On release, it wasn't terrible, but it wasn't even "good," either. It was on the lower end of "meh." But that doesn't excuse the extreme amount of hate it got from its very announcement. That was very much a group-think effort.
Why can't we ever go from a bad idea to a good idea? Why does it seem like when faced with a bad idea, we'll implement a worse one?
I suppose when a bad idea results in a disaster, it's highly visible. Everyone can see the awfulness. But a good idea is a little more boring, and nothing breaks in a spectacular way.
Maybe in that scenario. I wasn't there so I can't comment further.
But I have been in situations where my peers put on a lot of pressure.
You either fall in line with the group or you are an 'idiot'. Management does take its cues from underlings - it just sucks when you are not the underling they listen to.
The challenger case was an example of several different sorts of broken thinking: 1) Concerns engineers had over the design were not passed along to the contractor. 2) Evidence of O-ring erosion was not passed to NASA upper management. 3) The contractor identified O-ring erosion as a major problem and put into work a redesign. Shuttles were not grounded because this was considered an "acceptable flight risk." 4) We really need to get this launch going, we can't afford more delays. "I am appalled, appalled by your recommendation [to scrub the launch]. My God, Thiokol, when do you want me to launch, next April?" 5) Management ignored the express objections of engineering. They thought if the primary O-ring failed, the secondary O-ring would be sufficient, despite that being mere theory. It was a "criticality 1 component," and NASA regs forbid the reliance on a backup for a Criticality 1 component. 6) For unknown reasons, the contractor's management reversed itself the night before and recommended launch despite the temps and ice. NASA did not ask why. A chief engineer at the contracting company told his wife that night that the Space Shuttle Challenger would blow up.
The Shuttle disaster is the perfect example of reasonable, well-supported arguments being unable to penetrate the group-think of bad decisions, because other factors (launch delays, etc) were allowed to override a known flight risk.
She proved that even a used, smelly, worn-out tennis shoe could beat her
Most people would have voted for a used, smelly, worn-out tennis shoe over Trump as well. We were all fucked because they were really the two worst candidates for President I've ever seen.
If you're in IT, you better be an asshole or nothing will ever get done.
I've found that results in short-term gains only. Eventually your co-workers tend not to like you and don't want to work with you, regardless of whether they "have to" or not. It leads to stress in the office and employee turnover, which leads to more costs and delays.
Remember for imma, racism is learned and taught. I'm almost 100% sure his parents are republican and had the dial tuned to Fox News when this guy was a baby. He's been incodtrined to think all minorities == bad. It is ingrained in him.
He's also bought into the "welfare bums waste their money on designer labels" meme that rich people tell each other to make themselves feel better about cutting off social programs. After all, that's a lot easier to do if you're able to convince each other that poor people are poor because they deserve it, that they're sinful, rather than just ordinary folks trying to make ends meet.
50% of my graduating class were valedictorians of their high schools. Something like 80% got perfect mathematics SAT scores. I got perfect math SAT scores, and was by far the smartest in mathematics my school had ever seen. I got a 5 on my AP Calculus BC test. At MIT, I did only just OK in 18.014 and 18.024 (Calculus with Theory, for non-MIT folks)... only just OK
I did fantastic in high school, valedictorian of my high school, high math (and English, after enough retakes). Got to college, struggled in the Calculus courses, started doing even worse after the first year. Was the problem that the university was that much harder? Well yes it was, but there was a bigger problem. Away from home, I was away from the pressures of my parents. They were the ones that pushed me to excel, to make sure that Bs weren't something to settle for. I had control over my own time and my own work ethic, and I crumbled without those pillars, and had to relearn how to be a good student all over again.
Many smarty-pants don't do nearly as well in college as they guessed, and sometimes it's just they're introduced to freedom, and they might not know how to handle it.
One prominent example is minimum wage regulations. While the intent behind these may have been good, what they've ended up becoming are huge burdens to businesses that are already on the brink. It's not economically viable for a business to pay somebody far more than the value they're providing. What is the end result? Fewer jobs, and a lot more focus on automating away low-end jobs.
If a business can only exist by paying its permanent, full-time employees less than a living wage, then maybe that business shouldn't exist? We hear the same argument from the produce growers who claim they have to pay illegal immigrants dollars a day under the table, otherwise "food prices will rise." Well maybe the food prices should rise then. We should pay the actual costs.
GMO manufacturers have a long history of suing the pants off anyone so unfortunate as to have their crop contaminated by the GMO product. And they win.
No they don't. They have a history of suing people who fields are cross-contaminated, and who then use the herbicide to kill off the non-contaminated crops and doing this repeatedly until they have a field of GMO crops without ever purchasing the GMO seeds.
But if it's Prestone actually behind writing the rules for "chocolate"?
You really trust the government to not do that?
I sure as hell trust them a hell of a lot more than Hersheys, who have been lobbying relentlessly to get the FDA to change the definition of chocolate so that you don't need to include any cocoa butter, just corn oil and "natural flavorings." They want their waxy, tasteless chocolate substitute material to be defined as "chocolate." No thanks. If you sell something as chocolate, it should actually be chocolate. Not "chocolate-flavored." Otherwise, just call it a Hershey's Bar.
No Hillary was as unlikable as Trump was stupid. She was the third term Bill Clinton and the electorate didn't want another fucking Bush dynasty or Clinton dynasty. Not to mention she is a horrible cunt and a worthless human being. Being more evil than Trump is a goddamned accomplishment to boot.
However horrible Hillary was, she was nearly President. Let's not pretend that Trump had some sort of amazing landslide blowout.
How did I get to the TMZ website?! I thought I was on Slashdot! This is so weird. The site looks like Slashdot, but the stories are mindless crap about TV shows and pop culture.
There are few things that nerds care more about than TV shows and pop culture.
at the very least this will display to the world what anyone who watched SNL in the early 00's will tell you, that Jimmy Fallon is the unfunniest person on tv.
Jimmy Fallon is a gleeful, energetic fanboy. He's not a comedian (not a credible one) but he found his niche with pop culture talk show host, about the only thing where that attitude can actually work.
Have you had a look at the state's budget deficit lately? The tax rates?
Yes I have, according to the governor's office, the Proposed 2017-2018 budget will have a budget surplus of $2.5b. Much of that will go into the rainy day fund.
As for taxes, no I don't have a problem with them. I actually like my infrastructure and not having a broken down state. Now my local taxes, that's another matter.
Business is leaving the state in droves to escape the tax rates
And more are starting up to replace them; that's how it works. California's unemployment rate is 4.9%. A smidge higher than the national average, but hardly symptomatic of some mass exodus.
Slashdot Mirror
You seriously expect people to cancel their account because part of a new series was leaked (an account they will need the account for to finish watching)?
I would think so, in that people could unsub until the new episodes came out, but Netflix works on a "release all at once" model. So the last episode of the season comes out the same day as the first. And you don't pay per episode, so the cost to get just the final few episodes is the same as the cost to get the entire series, and it all happens at the same time.
The only people who this lost-subscriber theory might apply to are the folks who would have watched the first few episodes and thought "well this sucks now, I don't need to see the rest." Unsubscribing based just on the first few episodes of the new season. I would think that group would be fairly small.
Netflix was the rare bird who gave great content at a reasonable price.
Which is one of the reasons why the studios have tried so very hard to kill Netflix. They were quite open and vocal about their belief that Netflix's model absolutely screwed them over in the DVD era. Before streaming, everyone loved Netflix and you could get an amazing variety of things at a reasonable price, all in one place. But again, the studios HATED the fact that Netflix didn't charge premium prices for "premium" titles, they hated the fact that it was not pay-per-view, they hated the fact that rentals took away from their DVD sales numbers. They never forgave Netflix, and now that streaming puts the power back into studio hands, they are doing their best to cut off Netflix's oxygen supply.
Now that the studios can dictate who can stream, how, and with what prices, we see exorbitant prices, pay per view, many many services all with their own content, and nothing resembling anything like Netflix from the old days -- one-stop shopping for a reasonable price. And people wonder why old fogies like myself think streaming sucks compared to what we used to be able to get.
Same as Apple did when they started selling songs online, when the music industry was still very much used to the album model.
The movie industry learned a bit of a lesson from the music industry, and have made sure that they're not beholden to any particular service like the music industry became to Apple. The streaming choices are all very fractured, no particular company can claim dominance, and the movie studios seem like they're totally ok with totally withholding some content from the streaming world entirely, and withholding other content for anything other than an exorbitant price and locked-in DRM.
Yes, most users want a secure solution. The problem with pointing to walled gardens is most users don't even have a clue what the term "walled garden" even means, so they sure as hell aren't buying hardware because of it. They're choosing solutions because they're easier to use.
For most people, computers are a curious tool, but they are NOT worth investing time into just to make them work properly. They want something that is simple and easy while doing what they want.
Neither the summary, nor the original article mentioned Ghostbusters (2016).
The article specifically mentions: The cascade effect can help explain why great movies such as The Wizard of Oz or Heathers can flop at the box office, while terrible movies such as Hangover III rake in millions.
Ghostbusters might be an interesting example because it got a huge amount of bad buzz, even though almost none of the people who "hated it" had seen anything from it before it's release. On release, it wasn't terrible, but it wasn't even "good," either. It was on the lower end of "meh." But that doesn't excuse the extreme amount of hate it got from its very announcement. That was very much a group-think effort.
Why can't we ever go from a bad idea to a good idea? Why does it seem like when faced with a bad idea, we'll implement a worse one?
I suppose when a bad idea results in a disaster, it's highly visible. Everyone can see the awfulness. But a good idea is a little more boring, and nothing breaks in a spectacular way.
Maybe in that scenario. I wasn't there so I can't comment further.
But I have been in situations where my peers put on a lot of pressure.
You either fall in line with the group or you are an 'idiot'. Management does take its cues from underlings - it just sucks when you are not the underling they listen to.
The challenger case was an example of several different sorts of broken thinking:
1) Concerns engineers had over the design were not passed along to the contractor.
2) Evidence of O-ring erosion was not passed to NASA upper management.
3) The contractor identified O-ring erosion as a major problem and put into work a redesign. Shuttles were not grounded because this was considered an "acceptable flight risk."
4) We really need to get this launch going, we can't afford more delays. "I am appalled, appalled by your recommendation [to scrub the launch]. My God, Thiokol, when do you want me to launch, next April?"
5) Management ignored the express objections of engineering. They thought if the primary O-ring failed, the secondary O-ring would be sufficient, despite that being mere theory. It was a "criticality 1 component," and NASA regs forbid the reliance on a backup for a Criticality 1 component.
6) For unknown reasons, the contractor's management reversed itself the night before and recommended launch despite the temps and ice. NASA did not ask why. A chief engineer at the contracting company told his wife that night that the Space Shuttle Challenger would blow up.
The Shuttle disaster is the perfect example of reasonable, well-supported arguments being unable to penetrate the group-think of bad decisions, because other factors (launch delays, etc) were allowed to override a known flight risk.
Typically welfare "bums" that are wearing designer labels are wearing knock offs that are about as cheap as you can get.
Hey, I love Kirkland Signature jeans!
They look good, are cheap, last forever.
She proved that even a used, smelly, worn-out tennis shoe could beat her
Most people would have voted for a used, smelly, worn-out tennis shoe over Trump as well. We were all fucked because they were really the two worst candidates for President I've ever seen.
Again, no landslide or mandate for Donald Trump.
If you're in IT, you better be an asshole or nothing will ever get done.
I've found that results in short-term gains only.
Eventually your co-workers tend not to like you and don't want to work with you, regardless of whether they "have to" or not. It leads to stress in the office and employee turnover, which leads to more costs and delays.
Because posting a subject line is kindof pointless for a crappy one-sentence joke.
Football played the way it's meant to be played: all out war, with guns!
Ah, back to the old ways of the NFL: The Gun
Remember for imma, racism is learned and taught. I'm almost 100% sure his parents are republican and had the dial tuned to Fox News when this guy was a baby. He's been incodtrined to think all minorities == bad. It is ingrained in him.
He's also bought into the "welfare bums waste their money on designer labels" meme that rich people tell each other to make themselves feel better about cutting off social programs. After all, that's a lot easier to do if you're able to convince each other that poor people are poor because they deserve it, that they're sinful, rather than just ordinary folks trying to make ends meet.
Come on, man, if you've been trolling this long, you should know when you're getting trolled yourself. You're just feeding him.
50% of my graduating class were valedictorians of their high schools. Something like 80% got perfect mathematics SAT scores. I got perfect math SAT scores, and was by far the smartest in mathematics my school had ever seen. I got a 5 on my AP Calculus BC test. At MIT, I did only just OK in 18.014 and 18.024 (Calculus with Theory, for non-MIT folks) ... only just OK
I did fantastic in high school, valedictorian of my high school, high math (and English, after enough retakes). Got to college, struggled in the Calculus courses, started doing even worse after the first year. Was the problem that the university was that much harder? Well yes it was, but there was a bigger problem. Away from home, I was away from the pressures of my parents. They were the ones that pushed me to excel, to make sure that Bs weren't something to settle for. I had control over my own time and my own work ethic, and I crumbled without those pillars, and had to relearn how to be a good student all over again.
Many smarty-pants don't do nearly as well in college as they guessed, and sometimes it's just they're introduced to freedom, and they might not know how to handle it.
One prominent example is minimum wage regulations. While the intent behind these may have been good, what they've ended up becoming are huge burdens to businesses that are already on the brink. It's not economically viable for a business to pay somebody far more than the value they're providing. What is the end result? Fewer jobs, and a lot more focus on automating away low-end jobs.
If a business can only exist by paying its permanent, full-time employees less than a living wage, then maybe that business shouldn't exist? We hear the same argument from the produce growers who claim they have to pay illegal immigrants dollars a day under the table, otherwise "food prices will rise." Well maybe the food prices should rise then. We should pay the actual costs.
GMO manufacturers have a long history of suing the pants off anyone so unfortunate as to have their crop contaminated by the GMO product. And they win.
No they don't. They have a history of suing people who fields are cross-contaminated, and who then use the herbicide to kill off the non-contaminated crops and doing this repeatedly until they have a field of GMO crops without ever purchasing the GMO seeds.
But if it's Prestone actually behind writing the rules for "chocolate"?
You really trust the government to not do that?
I sure as hell trust them a hell of a lot more than Hersheys, who have been lobbying relentlessly to get the FDA to change the definition of chocolate so that you don't need to include any cocoa butter, just corn oil and "natural flavorings." They want their waxy, tasteless chocolate substitute material to be defined as "chocolate." No thanks. If you sell something as chocolate, it should actually be chocolate. Not "chocolate-flavored." Otherwise, just call it a Hershey's Bar.
No Hillary was as unlikable as Trump was stupid. She was the third term Bill Clinton and the electorate didn't want another fucking Bush dynasty or Clinton dynasty. Not to mention she is a horrible cunt and a worthless human being. Being more evil than Trump is a goddamned accomplishment to boot.
However horrible Hillary was, she was nearly President. Let's not pretend that Trump had some sort of amazing landslide blowout.
How did I get to the TMZ website?! I thought I was on Slashdot! This is so weird. The site looks like Slashdot, but the stories are mindless crap about TV shows and pop culture.
There are few things that nerds care more about than TV shows and pop culture.
It's pretty easy to predict an AC's character arc and motivations by around the 3-paragraph mark.
The HORROR.
at the very least this will display to the world what anyone who watched SNL in the early 00's will tell you, that Jimmy Fallon is the unfunniest person on tv.
Jimmy Fallon is a gleeful, energetic fanboy. He's not a comedian (not a credible one) but he found his niche with pop culture talk show host, about the only thing where that attitude can actually work.
Sadly, I've already commented and I don't use sockpuppet accounts, so I don't have a way to mod this up to the 5 that it deserves.
Sometimes being an a-hole is a sign of metal illness as well. I think we should all slow down and not be quick to judge.
Sometimes it's a sign of having a realistic outlook on things and not sugar coating them, too.
It's usually a sign of having a rather sheltered existence and an entitled attitude, without ever having been in his position.
Have you had a look at the state's budget deficit lately? The tax rates?
Yes I have, according to the governor's office, the Proposed 2017-2018 budget will have a budget surplus of $2.5b. Much of that will go into the rainy day fund.
As for taxes, no I don't have a problem with them. I actually like my infrastructure and not having a broken down state. Now my local taxes, that's another matter.
Business is leaving the state in droves to escape the tax rates
And more are starting up to replace them; that's how it works. California's unemployment rate is 4.9%. A smidge higher than the national average, but hardly symptomatic of some mass exodus.