e isn't self-important middle-aged white men. a demographic that's closer to the mark is kids and teens. *they're* the ones who are providing the main revenue stream for the industry
I remember reading statistics once that surprised me...the gist of it was that there are far more "older" gamers than people realize, and that the teen market doesn't even make up the majority. Still, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that he's projecting his own dissatisfaction onto entire gaming audience.
I wonder who the brainchild is at Apple that decided on the name "Tiger" for the upcoming release. Didn't they have any clue at all that this might happen?
I've gotta say that $10M is a BUTLOAD of cash. When I see those kinds of numbers, I can't help but wonder what in hell happened to make the project fail.
I like portage, but I have to say that the whole masking business is quite an annoyance. I don't encounter it often enough to remember what to do when the situation arises, so what should be a simple install turns into an exercise in burning time. Also, at some point, they'll probably encounter etc-update, and the (currently) arcane method of dealing with it. Not to worry- I think there's still quite a bit of "coolness" left. The "cool" they don't get during installation will come back to haunt them later on.
Then we have the individual copies of the work (mentioned above, which are material objects.
The copies are merely a means of conveyance. It could just as easily be sheet music, a cassette tape, or an MP3 player. They all refer to the same thing (the music), and they all do the same thing...convey, in one form or another, the musical creation of someone else. If you're suggesting that having a means of conveyance in your posession entitles you to distribute the contents, I'd say you're wrong. Back to my point...if you want to loan your CD to a friend, I'd say there's nothing wrong with it...so long as neither of you retain any copies while it's in the other's possession.
This is just nonsens with no meaning
Here is what it means: I create some music, and I'd like to offer people the chance to enjoy it. My terms are this: the CD costs $12.00, and I reasonably expect that anyone who is interested in the enjoyment that it will bring them, will pay me what I'm asking. I also reasonably expect that if the music is not of sufficient value, you will not steal it (as in, taking/using it without paying, or without asking). It's a contract of sorts. You either agree to the terms and get to enjoy the music, or you don't agree to the terms, and forgo the benefit that it would have provided. As the copyright holder, I can decide on the terms under which the music will be released. You have the right to decide if those terms are agreeable.
Interestingly, this is exactly how the procurement of a tangible item would work, except that taking without paying could very well land you in jail.
The format will be open and available for royalty-free licensing, and will be based on XML. Can we expect Microsoft to do this right?
No. Royalty-free licensing still allows them to place restrictions. And as for XML, so what? Word documents are in XML format, but the XML only encapsulates a bunch of stuff that's still proprietary and inaccesible. Lastly, the last thing anyone needs is another document format owned by a monopoly.
It is truly astonishing what is publicly available. We should all be more careful about what we let others know about us,
He makes this extremely good point some ways into the article. People are so gullilble. They're like Pavlov's dogs who salivate every time they see or hear the word "free", or come across anything that has some kind of "deal" attached to it. After the "I got something for free" rush wears off, the actual cost can be quite substantial.
I've managed to confound some people at a local specialty store- three times now they've offered me the opportunity to fill out a "deal" card, where they track your purchases. After a certain number, you get a small quantity of the same product for free. I've declined every time. It's just not worth it.
First off, music is not a tangible item. You "own" music the same way you'd own a live performance. What you own is the means (and the right) to enjoy the music at your discretion, according to the terms under which it was released.
Second, If you insist on using your analogy, then you have to be consistent. If you really feel that you "own" it, as you would a tangible item, then you must treat it like one. If you happen to "share" the music with a friend, you must have no semblance of it in your posession until your friend returns it- the same way you'd loan a tool, a car, a book, or whatever. I dare say that the vast majority of people who think they have an inherent right to distribute copyrighted work conveniently ignore this particular aspect.
I am still unsure as to how this perceived right ever made its way into the ongoing vitriol between the *AA and consumers. If I release music (for sale) that you decide you'd like to use for your entertainment, being able to back up, media shift and time shift are reasonable consumer expectations. Being able to pass my music around to others, at *your* whim, is not.
As this battle carries on, consumers ridding themselves of the idea that they have some kind of inherent "right" to distribute copyrighted work would be a step in the right direction (no pun intended).
and we have no leaders because of the smear-based media.
We have no leaders because we have no leaders. I think the media, to a large degree, is only a reflection of what we *do* have, and what we do have isn't pretty.
arguing against nuclear power as a clean energy source.
Clean? I don't think radioactive waste/contamination qualify as "clean". It's not clean...it's just a different kind of "not clean" than a coal-fired power plant, and in some ways, a lot more risky.
A company should have some kind of unification to both its information policies and procedures. When John Q. Manager/Employee can just whip up anything on a whim, I could see this easily ending up in a big mess. What if, at some point, all of the data have to be consolidated, but the means to collect and manage them have been implemented in 10 different ways? Could be a real problem.
I hope Mr. Ballmer & Co. remember this the next time they herd all their employees into the company's annual sales pitch for donations to United Way (or whatever their charity of choice is).
Yes...you're probably forgetting to add in the infrastructure required to support all of these people. Companies. Jobs. Schools. Police. Hospitals. Airports. Roads. Municipal facilities. Jails. Prisons. Water distribution. Sewage Treatment. Waste Disposal. Open space. Food production/distribution.
I'm sure I've left out a ton of stuff, but once you add all of these "extras" in, the notion that we can "fit everyone into an area the size of Texas" seems little more than an academic musing.
How are you going to have 3rd party people debug software they know nothing about?
I'd say that's the whole point. People who are too close to the project know exactly what to do, and what not to do. People who have never seen it don't know any of this, and this makes their approach unbiased. I'd also point out that bugs occur because of unexpected events. Who better do do something unexpected than someone who knows nothing about the software?
These are all truly what I would consider value-added services. It's odd that Accuweather feels that the average consumer can drop enough cash to install their own radar system to achieve the same kinds of results. The NOAA data is just text for crying out loud. But then again, when you have a government with its nose so TIGHTLY wedged between the ass cheeks of corporate america, logic doesn't apply - I guess the lack of oxygen is taking its toll. In 2008, expect to hear a loud sucking noise, and a shortage of the color brown.
You could turn a heterosexual into a homosexual and back into a heterosexual against their will by laying down situations and forcing a sexual response from them if you were immoral and ruthless enough to choose to do so.
No, just your understanding of logic and biology, which for all intents and purposes, seems fairly limited. If you can answer the question, "what is love?" I might start to take you seriously, but I dare say the chances are probably slim to none.
I don't think the issue with India was ever the quality of the code per se, but with all of the obstacles that might (and do) crop up when handing your information infrastructure over to a country halfway across the world. These things will happen despite any code quality issues. There was a recent post by someone responding to another article, that mentioned the ROI issues with respect to projects that are outsourced. Assuming it was accurate, it suggests that outsourcing isn't a cure-all, and the ROI is a long-term proposition.
Still - India did the right thing. It will be interesting to see how their anti-patent ethos meshes with the "patent every stray thought" mentality of the US. I wonder if the US could "help" India change its mind by threatening to withhold business if it doesn't comply.
Slashdot Mirror
e isn't self-important middle-aged white men. a demographic that's closer to the mark is kids and teens. *they're* the ones who are providing the main revenue stream for the industry
I remember reading statistics once that surprised me...the gist of it was that there are far more "older" gamers than people realize, and that the teen market doesn't even make up the majority. Still, I'm inclined to agree with the idea that he's projecting his own dissatisfaction onto entire gaming audience.
I wonder who the brainchild is at Apple that decided on the name "Tiger" for the upcoming release. Didn't they have any clue at all that this might happen?
I've gotta say that $10M is a BUTLOAD of cash. When I see those kinds of numbers, I can't help but wonder what in hell happened to make the project fail.
I like portage, but I have to say that the whole masking business is quite an annoyance. I don't encounter it often enough to remember what to do when the situation arises, so what should be a simple install turns into an exercise in burning time. Also, at some point, they'll probably encounter etc-update, and the (currently) arcane method of dealing with it. Not to worry- I think there's still quite a bit of "coolness" left. The "cool" they don't get during installation will come back to haunt them later on.
Then we have the individual copies of the work (mentioned above, which are material objects.
The copies are merely a means of conveyance. It could just as easily be sheet music, a cassette tape, or an MP3 player. They all refer to the same thing (the music), and they all do the same thing...convey, in one form or another, the musical creation of someone else. If you're suggesting that having a means of conveyance in your posession entitles you to distribute the contents, I'd say you're wrong. Back to my point...if you want to loan your CD to a friend, I'd say there's nothing wrong with it...so long as neither of you retain any copies while it's in the other's possession.
This is just nonsens with no meaning
Here is what it means: I create some music, and I'd like to offer people the chance to enjoy it. My terms are this: the CD costs $12.00, and I reasonably expect that anyone who is interested in the enjoyment that it will bring them, will pay me what I'm asking. I also reasonably expect that if the music is not of sufficient value, you will not steal it (as in, taking/using it without paying, or without asking). It's a contract of sorts. You either agree to the terms and get to enjoy the music, or you don't agree to the terms, and forgo the benefit that it would have provided. As the copyright holder, I can decide on the terms under which the music will be released. You have the right to decide if those terms are agreeable.
Interestingly, this is exactly how the procurement of a tangible item would work, except that taking without paying could very well land you in jail.
The format will be open and available for royalty-free licensing, and will be based on XML. Can we expect Microsoft to do this right?
No. Royalty-free licensing still allows them to place restrictions. And as for XML, so what? Word documents are in XML format, but the XML only encapsulates a bunch of stuff that's still proprietary and inaccesible. Lastly, the last thing anyone needs is another document format owned by a monopoly.
It is truly astonishing what is publicly available. We should all be more careful about what we let others know about us,
He makes this extremely good point some ways into the article. People are so gullilble. They're like Pavlov's dogs who salivate every time they see or hear the word "free", or come across anything that has some kind of "deal" attached to it. After the "I got something for free" rush wears off, the actual cost can be quite substantial.
I've managed to confound some people at a local specialty store- three times now they've offered me the opportunity to fill out a "deal" card, where they track your purchases. After a certain number, you get a small quantity of the same product for free. I've declined every time. It's just not worth it.
First off, music is not a tangible item. You "own" music the same way you'd own a live performance. What you own is the means (and the right) to enjoy the music at your discretion, according to the terms under which it was released.
Second, If you insist on using your analogy, then you have to be consistent. If you really feel that you "own" it, as you would a tangible item, then you must treat it like one. If you happen to "share" the music with a friend, you must have no semblance of it in your posession until your friend returns it- the same way you'd loan a tool, a car, a book, or whatever. I dare say that the vast majority of people who think they have an inherent right to distribute copyrighted work conveniently ignore this particular aspect.
and unable to be shared around to friends.
I am still unsure as to how this perceived right ever made its way into the ongoing vitriol between the *AA and consumers. If I release music (for sale) that you decide you'd like to use for your entertainment, being able to back up, media shift and time shift are reasonable consumer expectations. Being able to pass my music around to others, at *your* whim, is not.
As this battle carries on, consumers ridding themselves of the idea that they have some kind of inherent "right" to distribute copyrighted work would be a step in the right direction (no pun intended).
and we have no leaders because of the smear-based media.
We have no leaders because we have no leaders. I think the media, to a large degree, is only a reflection of what we *do* have, and what we do have isn't pretty.
arguing against nuclear power as a clean energy source.
Clean? I don't think radioactive waste/contamination qualify as "clean". It's not clean...it's just a different kind of "not clean" than a coal-fired power plant, and in some ways, a lot more risky.
A company should have some kind of unification to both its information policies and procedures. When John Q. Manager/Employee can just whip up anything on a whim, I could see this easily ending up in a big mess. What if, at some point, all of the data have to be consolidated, but the means to collect and manage them have been implemented in 10 different ways? Could be a real problem.
I'm still amazed that they get paid to do this. Talk about a compaoy outliving its usefulness...
I hope Mr. Ballmer & Co. remember this the next time they herd all their employees into the company's annual sales pitch for donations to United Way (or whatever their charity of choice is).
Do you actually think that most of them care?
You're talking about enlightened consumers. I'm sorry to say that bsed on my own observations, it seems they're a small minority.
The point is that Texas takes up a very small portion of the earth's surface.
I don't disagree. But nobody has come up with an estimate as to how much this estimate would change if all of the infrastructure were included.
Yes...you're probably forgetting to add in the infrastructure required to support all of these people. Companies. Jobs. Schools. Police. Hospitals. Airports. Roads. Municipal facilities. Jails. Prisons. Water distribution. Sewage Treatment. Waste Disposal. Open space. Food production/distribution.
I'm sure I've left out a ton of stuff, but once you add all of these "extras" in, the notion that we can "fit everyone into an area the size of Texas" seems little more than an academic musing.
How are you going to have 3rd party people debug software they know nothing about?
I'd say that's the whole point. People who are too close to the project know exactly what to do, and what not to do. People who have never seen it don't know any of this, and this makes their approach unbiased. I'd also point out that bugs occur because of unexpected events. Who better do do something unexpected than someone who knows nothing about the software?
I bet most don't even read their own mail
Mail? Ha...I bet most don't even read the laws they're proposing, much less voting for.
These are all truly what I would consider value-added services. It's odd that Accuweather feels that the average consumer can drop enough cash to install their own radar system to achieve the same kinds of results. The NOAA data is just text for crying out loud. But then again, when you have a government with its nose so TIGHTLY wedged between the ass cheeks of corporate america, logic doesn't apply - I guess the lack of oxygen is taking its toll. In 2008, expect to hear a loud sucking noise, and a shortage of the color brown.
You could turn a heterosexual into a homosexual and back into a heterosexual against their will by laying down situations and forcing a sexual response from them if you were immoral and ruthless enough to choose to do so.
Sure. It's all physical. Nothing else matters.
No, just your understanding of logic and biology, which for all intents and purposes, seems fairly limited. If you can answer the question, "what is love?" I might start to take you seriously, but I dare say the chances are probably slim to none.
I don't think the issue with India was ever the quality of the code per se, but with all of the obstacles that might (and do) crop up when handing your information infrastructure over to a country halfway across the world. These things will happen despite any code quality issues. There was a recent post by someone responding to another article, that mentioned the ROI issues with respect to projects that are outsourced. Assuming it was accurate, it suggests that outsourcing isn't a cure-all, and the ROI is a long-term proposition.
Still - India did the right thing. It will be interesting to see how their anti-patent ethos meshes with the "patent every stray thought" mentality of the US. I wonder if the US could "help" India change its mind by threatening to withhold business if it doesn't comply.
It's upAndDown, backAndForth, sideToSide, makeItStop, and soSeaSick.