This is the reason. High tech today is mostly low tech. They want technicians, not engineers. They want a work force resmebling modern assembly line workers. This is what the big push for CS is about, because it's not really CS that they're teaching but skills to use a computer.
There are US schools that can't even afford repairs to their buildings. We have essentially a two tier system in the US, not official of course. The wealthy schools and the neglected schools. Separate and unequal. Even in the same school district you can see the poor schools vs the good schools. Where the money goes we don't know, but it's not to better teachers or better buildings.
Yep. The traditional right vs left that originated in post revolutionary France has been obsolete ever since those days. There is not a political spectrum, it's a political hologram. The US is overly stupid on this trying to label states as red or blue when they're all very much a muddy mix. But the rest of the world is still confused on this, when they say "right/left of center" and think it means the same thing in even two different countries.
I only got past the intro in new Tomb Raider. I felt the whole thing was insulting my intelligence. Every few feet there'd be a bright icon telling me what to do. No puzzles need solving. Jerk mouse back and forth quickly to break free, etc. It's the sort of crap you expect on consoles when you have limited input options or the game is designed for pre-teens.
When the Thief reboot was first previewed from Eidos, the fan base erupted in anger over quick time events and other "cinematic" fluff. To their credit, the team at Eidos Montreal revamped a whole lot of the interface and game, including adding a very nice set of detailed gameplay options, just before they were shut down by the mothership for daring to waste money addressing customer concerns.
Well, they "should" do that. But almost all prisons used one of two different services. Those services jacked up the rates, then kicked back a share of the profits to the prisons to ensure that they continued to have the business. The prisons were not the ones paying any per-minute fees. They don't care how much the prisoners end up paying, and they're unlikely to shop around for better service out of the goodness of their hearts.
The cost came from the phone companies. The prisons went along because the phone companies kicked back some of the profits, so there was no shopping around for cheaper service. None of this had anything whatsoever to do with archivals or prison policies. The prices became exhorbitant before there was regular recording of all calls.
If the phones get broken, charge the cost of repair to the prisons instead of lumping it into cost of dialing. I know if I break my phone at home or the lines have problems that I have to pay for the repairs myself.
Well, their core stuff is just dumb JRPG. Their acquired stuff I think they're screwing up. Tomb Raider reboot bears no resemblance to the original, is full of idiotic quick time events, etc. Console-itis galore.
The problem is that so many people have different attitudes than you do. If they're on a computer then they feel that they are entitled to be paid for it. It's what we learned from the shareware model; only a nerd uses a computer because they like computers because the cool kids demand payment.
This is youtube. It has had no worthwhile content in the past, and it's not about to start now. Youtube is free content now because that's the only thing it is worth. $10 a month is ridiculously expensive for something of such low quality and value.
We use adblock because of security AND because we find ads annoying AND we find advertisers to be evil leeches who suck blood while contributing nothing in return (and I won't apologize for insulting your chosen profession).
Seriously? I can find stuff on Netflix easily. Search by title, author, etc. I don't have to filter out the top 25 hits for being irrelevant like I do on youtube. Netflix gives me suggestions of things I might like and it's not too far off (though often it's things I've already seen prior to Netflix). Youtube is still convinced that I want to see some Kanye video just because it's popular amongst other people who aren't like me. I watch some game videos, then Youtube thinks I want to see a thousand different minecraft videos for some stupid reason. My friend at works says to watch this funny video, I watch it, am not amused, then Youtube thinks I want to see more of that junk.
That's a huge amount of ad revenue for one person over one month using only youtube. Either there's are a lot of people out there highly influence by ads who spend an enormous amount of money, or they're inflating how much a view of a 3 minute video is actually worth. In one month I am not generating $10 in additional profits just because I watched youtube, I didn't change my laundry detergent, I didn't buy a new car, I didn't go see any movies, I didn't try a new brand of beer, etc. The big purchases where it might matter are rare and I do my own research before buying.
This all feels too much like the broken economic model during the dotcom era, the "new economy" where they valued each advertisement view much higher if it was on the internet versus views from radio, television, or print. I think companies are overpaying the advertisers and they're not measuring exactly how much they gain from each dollar paid out to an advertiser.
On my PC with adblock I never see youtube ads. With youtube on my TV though I do see ads. And amazingly annoying stupid ads. "You can skip this commercial in 6 seconds..." Stupid because often I can skip them before the movie trailer even gets off of the logo for production company. Some of those ads are so annoying that I just stop and don't continue and never watch the actual video itself. I'm sure I can configure some router to block all these ads but that's a hassle.
Recently, CBS started demanding that I watch ads when I see Big Bang Theory, stating clearly that I need to stop using adblock. They are long ads, no fast forward like you can with a DVR, even if I switch to another window to browse the web while waiting I still hear the annoying audio in the background, then once the show start up I have to rewind it a bit. All the annoyance of old school TV but without the mitigating effects of DVRs and VCRs, and added annoyance that it is only available on computer and not on my TV. So yes, it's a show I like and I may stop watching it altogether because of ads.
In a way yes. Because when I had satellite, my Tivo would tell me what channels things were on. It would even track when a program moved to a different channel. The same interface applied to every single channel.
The ads are minor. Especially compared to in-your-face crap like Youtube. Roku only have ads for what is available on Roku. When I point out that HBO has ads I find a horde of fans telling me that I'm wrong because it only shows ads for its own shows. So if HBO gets off the hook for ads then Roku should get off the hook, and those Roku ads are much less intrusive than HBO ads because you're so rarely on the main screen.
However the 100 different interfaces problem applies to Roku also. There is no common interface. Netflix works one way; it has a look and feel, it remembers what you watched, you create your own playlist, etc. Pop over to other "channels" and they're different, some have no playlist at all, most won't remember any history of what you watched, etc. And while Roku lets you search across channels it's somewhat pointless since 99% of the hits are all expensive purchases; it doesn't have a global playlist or wishlist, etc. Netflix will sometimes send me an email when there's a new season of a show I watch, Roku never does that but it keeps sending me mail about expensive movies or premium subscription services.
But it's ok for Roku I guess, it does what it's supposed to do, provide easy access to various services in an inexpensive box with a remote control (none of that Chromecast your-phone-is-your-remote crap).
We wanted ala carte pricing but did not get it. Netflix is not ala-carte. Hulu is not ala-carte. Amazon is not ala-carte. This new youtube is not ala-carte. Ala-carte means we get one show to pick, or maybe four shows at max. Then we can mix and choose. That ala-carte per show should be much cheaper than $8-10 a month. The problem with picking multiple streaming providers is that you get an enormous amount of overlap. Most of the shows on Netflix are probably on the other services as well.
But may you mean ala-carte is "per channel". But streaming services don't really have the channel concept. What Roku calls a "channel" is an entire streaming service, some pay, some free, some convenient to use, some are inconvenient. But they're not the same as old style channels. So I get 95% of what want to watch is on Netflix for $8/month, but for that other 5% it means I pay another $8 or more just for one program, with no chance to try it out first to see if I like it, etc. So I skip that other 5%, I tell myself I didn't really want to watch it and besides I've got a decade of backlog to catch up on anyway.
Granted, after all is said and done, subscribing to four different streaming services is still much cheaper than subscribing to cable!
These new shows created exclusively for one particular service or another I can skip. I don't care enough for them to subscribe to a completely new service; just like I would never subscribe to just HBO for that one show where main characters die off at random and regular intervals. If streaming services all start migrating to exclusive original content and stop supplying the bulk of the content which were developed somewhere else, then I think they're going to have problems in the long run.
The new youtube service sounds pointless. You can already filter out the ads. And the quality on youtube is so extremely low to start with. User made videos, almost all amateur or wannabe pros (who get a few cents every now and then), low quality stuff overall. It's too huge a price to pay per month for something of so little value.
I was surprised too. They'd gone so long without a new episode, and I thought I heard the series was over, so I didn't pay attention for a couple of years. Now I only have netflix so I can't get the latest episodes anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the reason. High tech today is mostly low tech. They want technicians, not engineers. They want a work force resmebling modern assembly line workers. This is what the big push for CS is about, because it's not really CS that they're teaching but skills to use a computer.
There are US schools that can't even afford repairs to their buildings. We have essentially a two tier system in the US, not official of course. The wealthy schools and the neglected schools. Separate and unequal. Even in the same school district you can see the poor schools vs the good schools. Where the money goes we don't know, but it's not to better teachers or better buildings.
Yep. The traditional right vs left that originated in post revolutionary France has been obsolete ever since those days. There is not a political spectrum, it's a political hologram. The US is overly stupid on this trying to label states as red or blue when they're all very much a muddy mix. But the rest of the world is still confused on this, when they say "right/left of center" and think it means the same thing in even two different countries.
It's how the US works. Never let the facts get in the way of a good horror story that increases political donations.
How do you get the old seasons though, without buying DVDs?
I only got past the intro in new Tomb Raider. I felt the whole thing was insulting my intelligence. Every few feet there'd be a bright icon telling me what to do. No puzzles need solving. Jerk mouse back and forth quickly to break free, etc. It's the sort of crap you expect on consoles when you have limited input options or the game is designed for pre-teens.
When the Thief reboot was first previewed from Eidos, the fan base erupted in anger over quick time events and other "cinematic" fluff. To their credit, the team at Eidos Montreal revamped a whole lot of the interface and game, including adding a very nice set of detailed gameplay options, just before they were shut down by the mothership for daring to waste money addressing customer concerns.
Well, they "should" do that. But almost all prisons used one of two different services. Those services jacked up the rates, then kicked back a share of the profits to the prisons to ensure that they continued to have the business. The prisons were not the ones paying any per-minute fees. They don't care how much the prisoners end up paying, and they're unlikely to shop around for better service out of the goodness of their hearts.
No, they used to be $14 a minute.
This is the problem. There should not be a prison "industry".
The cost came from the phone companies. The prisons went along because the phone companies kicked back some of the profits, so there was no shopping around for cheaper service. None of this had anything whatsoever to do with archivals or prison policies. The prices became exhorbitant before there was regular recording of all calls.
If the phones get broken, charge the cost of repair to the prisons instead of lumping it into cost of dialing. I know if I break my phone at home or the lines have problems that I have to pay for the repairs myself.
Well, their core stuff is just dumb JRPG. Their acquired stuff I think they're screwing up. Tomb Raider reboot bears no resemblance to the original, is full of idiotic quick time events, etc. Console-itis galore.
The problem is that so many people have different attitudes than you do. If they're on a computer then they feel that they are entitled to be paid for it. It's what we learned from the shareware model; only a nerd uses a computer because they like computers because the cool kids demand payment.
I tried rotating the monitor, but then the picture was on its side.
11. Start and end each video by reminding viewers to subscribe and to watch your hundreds of other misleading videos.
This is youtube. It has had no worthwhile content in the past, and it's not about to start now. Youtube is free content now because that's the only thing it is worth. $10 a month is ridiculously expensive for something of such low quality and value.
We use adblock because of security AND because we find ads annoying AND we find advertisers to be evil leeches who suck blood while contributing nothing in return (and I won't apologize for insulting your chosen profession).
HBO has ads though, it advertises its own shows! You may not call them ads, but that's what they are even if you're already a subscriber.
Seriously? I can find stuff on Netflix easily. Search by title, author, etc. I don't have to filter out the top 25 hits for being irrelevant like I do on youtube. Netflix gives me suggestions of things I might like and it's not too far off (though often it's things I've already seen prior to Netflix). Youtube is still convinced that I want to see some Kanye video just because it's popular amongst other people who aren't like me. I watch some game videos, then Youtube thinks I want to see a thousand different minecraft videos for some stupid reason. My friend at works says to watch this funny video, I watch it, am not amused, then Youtube thinks I want to see more of that junk.
So? 83.3 million of those Youtube videos are garbage that aren't worth watching.
That's a huge amount of ad revenue for one person over one month using only youtube. Either there's are a lot of people out there highly influence by ads who spend an enormous amount of money, or they're inflating how much a view of a 3 minute video is actually worth. In one month I am not generating $10 in additional profits just because I watched youtube, I didn't change my laundry detergent, I didn't buy a new car, I didn't go see any movies, I didn't try a new brand of beer, etc. The big purchases where it might matter are rare and I do my own research before buying.
This all feels too much like the broken economic model during the dotcom era, the "new economy" where they valued each advertisement view much higher if it was on the internet versus views from radio, television, or print. I think companies are overpaying the advertisers and they're not measuring exactly how much they gain from each dollar paid out to an advertiser.
They grandfather people in on the earlier price I think, though I suspect they'll bump that up eventually.
On my PC with adblock I never see youtube ads. With youtube on my TV though I do see ads. And amazingly annoying stupid ads. "You can skip this commercial in 6 seconds..." Stupid because often I can skip them before the movie trailer even gets off of the logo for production company. Some of those ads are so annoying that I just stop and don't continue and never watch the actual video itself. I'm sure I can configure some router to block all these ads but that's a hassle.
Recently, CBS started demanding that I watch ads when I see Big Bang Theory, stating clearly that I need to stop using adblock. They are long ads, no fast forward like you can with a DVR, even if I switch to another window to browse the web while waiting I still hear the annoying audio in the background, then once the show start up I have to rewind it a bit. All the annoyance of old school TV but without the mitigating effects of DVRs and VCRs, and added annoyance that it is only available on computer and not on my TV. So yes, it's a show I like and I may stop watching it altogether because of ads.
In a way yes. Because when I had satellite, my Tivo would tell me what channels things were on. It would even track when a program moved to a different channel. The same interface applied to every single channel.
The ads are minor. Especially compared to in-your-face crap like Youtube. Roku only have ads for what is available on Roku. When I point out that HBO has ads I find a horde of fans telling me that I'm wrong because it only shows ads for its own shows. So if HBO gets off the hook for ads then Roku should get off the hook, and those Roku ads are much less intrusive than HBO ads because you're so rarely on the main screen.
However the 100 different interfaces problem applies to Roku also. There is no common interface. Netflix works one way; it has a look and feel, it remembers what you watched, you create your own playlist, etc. Pop over to other "channels" and they're different, some have no playlist at all, most won't remember any history of what you watched, etc. And while Roku lets you search across channels it's somewhat pointless since 99% of the hits are all expensive purchases; it doesn't have a global playlist or wishlist, etc. Netflix will sometimes send me an email when there's a new season of a show I watch, Roku never does that but it keeps sending me mail about expensive movies or premium subscription services.
But it's ok for Roku I guess, it does what it's supposed to do, provide easy access to various services in an inexpensive box with a remote control (none of that Chromecast your-phone-is-your-remote crap).
We wanted ala carte pricing but did not get it. Netflix is not ala-carte. Hulu is not ala-carte. Amazon is not ala-carte. This new youtube is not ala-carte. Ala-carte means we get one show to pick, or maybe four shows at max. Then we can mix and choose. That ala-carte per show should be much cheaper than $8-10 a month. The problem with picking multiple streaming providers is that you get an enormous amount of overlap. Most of the shows on Netflix are probably on the other services as well.
But may you mean ala-carte is "per channel". But streaming services don't really have the channel concept. What Roku calls a "channel" is an entire streaming service, some pay, some free, some convenient to use, some are inconvenient. But they're not the same as old style channels. So I get 95% of what want to watch is on Netflix for $8/month, but for that other 5% it means I pay another $8 or more just for one program, with no chance to try it out first to see if I like it, etc. So I skip that other 5%, I tell myself I didn't really want to watch it and besides I've got a decade of backlog to catch up on anyway.
Granted, after all is said and done, subscribing to four different streaming services is still much cheaper than subscribing to cable!
These new shows created exclusively for one particular service or another I can skip. I don't care enough for them to subscribe to a completely new service; just like I would never subscribe to just HBO for that one show where main characters die off at random and regular intervals. If streaming services all start migrating to exclusive original content and stop supplying the bulk of the content which were developed somewhere else, then I think they're going to have problems in the long run.
The new youtube service sounds pointless. You can already filter out the ads. And the quality on youtube is so extremely low to start with. User made videos, almost all amateur or wannabe pros (who get a few cents every now and then), low quality stuff overall. It's too huge a price to pay per month for something of so little value.
I was surprised too. They'd gone so long without a new episode, and I thought I heard the series was over, so I didn't pay attention for a couple of years. Now I only have netflix so I can't get the latest episodes anyway.