What I don't understand is why doesn't anybody make an extendable player, where the user can add support for additional codecs via third party plugins?
Because they'd have to add more memory for that, with dubious benefits. The vast majority of compressed music out there is still mp3. There isn't anything you can get in another codec that you can't get in mp3, so it really isn't worth the added expense, difficulty, and battery drain to have such a feature.
Re:Didja all catch...
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
When Dow bought UC, they bought their messes too, just like if you marry someone with bad credit.
Interesting point about the Indian government, though.
Users care about what they are trying to do, not how they are doing it.
I don't think that's true at all. Users do care how they are doing it.
Have you ever tried to sell OpenOffice to a business? (I mean sell as in convince them to use, not as in charge money for it) I have.
It was a small sheet metal company. They had a couple of old Macs (pre-PPC) and an old windows box for running AutoCAD. They wanted a network with 7 PCs (2 for the shop, 4 for the office, 1 CAD station) and a file server. This was a very small company and very price conscious, but when I mentioned they could save over $1000 (about 15%) by using OpenOffice instead of MS Office they looked like deer caught in headlights, despite all my assurances that OpenOffice would easily fill all their needs (and yes, it really would have. I was moonlighting and my company worked very close with the company in question, and I took the project on as a favor to my boss, who was very good friends with the owner of said company).
This company didn't have any vested interest in MS Office, yet they couldn't imagine not using it, since that's what everybody else was using.
Never underestimate the power of Brand. Yeah, people care mostly about what they are doing, but god forbid they should be doing it a different way than everyone else.
Computers should be used as a tool to teach math, not as a tool to teach Computers....
And before some fool comes and says "You dont know math if you use a calculator, you dont know math is you use a computer"
Theres a difference between knowing math, and knowing how to work with numbers, number crunching is not knowing math.
Math is a language, and as such syntax and concepts must be treated as inseperable if you expect students to actually be able to use it. The best way to learn syntax is through repetition, and that means number crunching.
Are you suggesting that grammar shouldn't be taught in English classes? That's the equivalent of what your are suggesting for math.
That said, the current mode of thought in grade schools math education is very much like yours. My little brother (now 12) has been allowed to use a calculator in class for several years now, even on tests. Guess what? He doesn't understand math at all. How do you understand fractions when you don't understand how division works?
The fundamental problem is GIGO (old school computer term, Garbage In, Garbage Out for those to young to be familiar with it). It goes like this:
1) Student buttons on calculator 2) Calculator gives answer 3) Student writes answer on paper and hands it in
That's all well and good as long as the student entered everything into the calculator correctly. The problem occurs when the student makes a mistake, and for someone like my brother, who has basically never had to do math by hand, there is no reason to question the results. If the calculator tells him 9 * 9 = 18, that's what he'll write down.
That's the problem at lower grade levels, but it becomes far worse once they get to more complex subjects. You end up with students who got 'A's in math all through high school, but they're totally lost when they start taking Calculus because they don't understand how the fundamental operations work. They don't understand how they work because that was always done for them by their calculator.
Memorizing multiplication tables isn't just busy work, it teaches muliplication using concrete examples, and provides a necessary link to more basic teaching methods if needed (9 piles containing 9 beans each gives a total of 81 beans, and any child who knows how to count can verify and understand that).
I was a college math tutor for 2 years, and around half of my students were exactly what I describe above (the other half were older people going back to school who had forgotten everything since they took algebra 15 years ago). It's very sad to see an 'A' student needing a calculator to multiply by tens. Not only does it mean they don't understand multiplication, but that they don't understand how the number system works at all.
Teachers today treat Computers like they are mysterious
Teachers treat a lot of things as mysterious, especially anything math related. The root of the problem there, IMHO, is that there is essentially no math requirement for grade school teachers. How can someone who doesn't understand math themselves teach it effectively? We wouldn't let someone who didn't speak Spanish teach Spanish, so why do we let people who don't know math teach math?
If you don't understand math, you're not really going to understand computers (or the bulk of the sciences for that matter, which is a much larger issue).
spend too much time teaching "Computers" instead of using Computers to teach everything else.
I'd say exactly the opposite. Not everyone has access to a computer outside of school, and those are exactly the people who need to learn how to use one. I think it would do far more harm than good to take that away.
Similarly, there is very little benefit to using computers in a traditional classroom environment. There are educational programs that can be effective, we had one for algebra at the JC I tutored for, but they aren't good for everyone, and they seem to mostly be targetted at those who just needed to get it out of the way for their GE requirements than someone who intended to go on to more advanced maths.
I think it's possible to have a successful computer-based program, but the key is to make sure it's the student doing the work, not the machine.
There's a basic truth there that I didn't understand until I became a tutor: the more the student has to do by hand, the better they will understand what they're doing. The first thing I would do with a student who was really struggling with concepts was make them put their calculator away. The results were almost magical.
A web connected Tablet connected to everyones desk would be far more efficient than notebooks and the current tools, and a smartboard is far more efficient than a chalk board.
More efficient for what? Not for learning. Writing notes down by hand reinforces memory by involving the sense of touch. The more senses are involved, the more likely you are to remember something.
Just like a calculator is far more efficient than Pen and Paper, you can learn math just fine with just a calculator, you can learn math with a computer.
A calculator is more efficient for doing math, but is an obstacle to learning math. Students don't learn math when the work is done for them. Period.
The only reason a computer would useful for teaching math is because it can be programmed not to do the work for the student.
And before some fool comes and says "You dont know math if you use a calculator, you dont know math is you use a computer"
Theres a difference between knowing math, and knowing how to work with numbers, number crunching is not knowing math.
For those who know math a calculator is a tool, and a very useful one. For those who don't know math a calculator is a crutch, and a dangerous one. A calculator can't teach you math, and you can't learn math when all the work is being done for you.
This story is important to publishers of books and magazines, and also the writers and journalists who provide their content, who are no longer the primary source of information for most people. They assume that the rest of us care for the same reason/.ers think everyone else cares that there's a new security patch for IE: because it's terribly important to them.
When it comes down to it though, it really is a fundamental shift in the way Americans access information, and there are good reasons for it. There is a lot of information out there that simply can't be found otherwise. Remember the 1-800-DENTIST commercials from a few years back? It was a number you could call to get a recomendation for a dentist and they supposedly would supply you with all sorts of information about that dentist. I don't remember a similar service for doctors, or mechanics, so where would you go to find that information?
The reason teachers still recommend books, though, has very little to do with finding relevant information, which generally isn't difficult in a school research paper scenario. The difficulty is in finding reliable information, which the internet really isn't that good at. At least with books it's reasonable to assume that there has been some review and verification of the information provided, and that just isn't true on the net.
I'm just a technician, but every working EE and 95% of working Programmers I know are considerably older than 29.
Maybe it really is that bad in places like San Jose, I don't know. If so, then it's time to do something about the H1-B situation, and that means Unions. I know that's an unpopular concept among the high tech crowd, but sometimes it's the only way to protect yourself.
What? In what way is a Tivo "interactive Television"?
The correct answer here would be "Internet". That would also be the correct answer to the Video Phone question as well. The only thing those camera phones bring to the eqution is mobility, and even that is questionable since there have been laptops with built-in cameras for a few years now.
Tivo is interactive television the same way that cuddling is a contact sport.
The burden is on the media to present an accurate story. I don't think that NASA should expend time and energy to refute the crackpots themselves, but should make sure that they are available and helpful to any journalists investigating these theories.
It's an FPS, it currently runs on Win32 and Linux (including ppc). It's at the early beta stage (current version is something like 0.3) but already very playable, and it's been reasonably stable for me on SuSE 8.0 with the stock kernel. YMMV, obviously. It's also Open Source.
The graphics still need some work, but I'm getting up to 300fps on a 700MHz Athlon with 384M RAM and a GeForce 2 GTS, so it should run fine on all of your machines. I haven't tried multiplayer yet, so I'm not sure if that works as well as the single player.
No because the dtd and/or namespace will have to be referenced in plain text in the xml document. so, even if they use absurdly complex element names, they have to use a valid dtd or namespace uri which can be easily referenced
I think an analogy to Frontpage is appropriate here. Sure, it produces HTML, but the result just doesn't look right unless it's viewed in IE. Maybe the dtd is referenced, but encrypted or otherwise proprietary. Maybe MSXMLVIEWER (whatever it may be called) doesn't need the reference to be in plain text.
There are any number of things MS could do to ensure that the document just doesn't look right in other viewers. Since formatting is the whole point of XML, people will use MSXMLVIEWER and whatever it reads will be the de facto XML standard, just like whatever IE renders is the de facto HTML standard.
or it just ain't xml at all.
While technically correct, the point is sadly irrelevant. As long as MS is effectively a monopoly XML will be whatever they say it is, for the majority of people.
Also you aren't allowed to put binary data in an xml document
Not true. It's recomended that you don't put binary in an XML document, but nothing prevents you from doing so. This is exactly what will give MS the ability to hijack the standard.
In conclusion they would have to break xml pretty hard-core in order to make their doc types proprietary.
Only in spirit, I'm afraid, but that will likely be enough.
Besides, then what would be the point of going xml in the first place?
To make documents searchable. This is an ability which is extremely valuable to anyone who has a large amount of information they need to access. The upshot is that the actual content will likely be plain text, though important markups may not be. Sadly, format is more important than content for a lot of people.
Of course, most people won't use the XML format at all, since it won't be the default.
Sadly, most computer equipment isn't even designed for a three year lifespan
I don't know where you've been getting your hardware, but I've got several computers ranging in age from 4-15 years, all of which work just fine. Of course, nobody wants to use them, so who cares?
I'd be much more willing to buy CD's if they were not insanely expensive.
Most people would, and that point has already been proven with VHS. I remember back in the '80s when getting a movie on VHS could run as high as $80, everybody and their third uncle had a shelf full blank tapes that they'd copied 2-3 movies that they'd rented onto. Priacy was rampant, and nobody felt even the tiniest bit of guilt about it.
Who pirates VHS now? Nobody I know. Why bother when you can just buy a new copy, cover art and all, for $10?
About 10 years ago there was a small store in my town that sold new CDs for $8-13, and they did pretty brisk business. Granted, they mostly carried indie stuff, but for 8 bucks I'm willing to check out a band I've never heard of, and in fact I did quite frequently. I even found a few that I liked!;-)
The funny thing is, I have no problem dropping $40 for 4 or 5 CDs, but at $20 each there's an even chance that I won't buy 1, even though I've got that same $40 in my pocket.
What the RIAA needs to realize is that piracy is the dark side of supply and demand. If they price their stuff too high, piracy kicks in to bring the average price down to where it should be. If they dropped the price of a CD by $5, they would easily make up what they'd lose per individual sale through volume, as it becomes less worthwhile to pirate and more attractive to try something new.
You can't legislate your way out of the Law of Supply and Demand any more than you can legislate yourself out of the Law of Gravity.
I should note that the store I mentioned above didn't go out of business because they weren't making enough money. The building owner decided they really wanted a hair salon there (which failed in short order) and the guy who owned the store moved to the Bay Area (IIRC). The hair salon idea was fueled by the repeated attempts to keep local kids from being visible to the tourists, since my town labors under the delusion that it's economy is dependent on tourism (easily proven false, but there's no need to go into that here).
The best you could hope for with digital data is to burn it to CD-R (not CD-RW) and mail it to yourself. Doing this once a month should be sufficient. leave the envelopes sealed, as that's the only timestamp you'll have that will stand up in court.
The problem is that it's so easy to alter digital data. If it's stored on a medium that's writable, it can be changed. CD-R is in theory not writable, but you can alter the date that's burned on the CD fairly easily, making it quite simple to falsify, and therefore creating the need to verify the date the CD was burned. The USPS is the cheapest and easiest way to do this.
If I were a judge, I would never accept a digital timestamp as proof. If I were a lawyer opposing you, the first thing I'd do is bring in someone to explain to the court all the reasons digital data can't be trusted.
If this is actually important to you, you don't want to be the test case for this type of timestamp.
Now if only computer manufacturers could make equipment even remotely this sturdy.
Who says they don't? I'd say that the fact that you won't be using the same computer 30 years from now has very little to do with reliability. In which case, why bother designing for a 30 year lifespan?
Chances are good that the girl's parents aren't loaded, so it isn't likely that he'll get much more than a six figure settlement, and even that is probably pushing it.
All the more reason to pursue it, I say. It's one thing to get a slap on the wrist and maybe feel a little guilty for ruining some guys life and career, it's another thing to have your lie bring your entire family to financial ruin or put yourself in debt for well into the forseeable future.
The fact that the mother was so hot to keep pressing charges even after the girl admitted it was all a lie means she needs to get smacked down too.
The point of punitive damages is not that the victim is set for life, but rather that the perptrator is punished.
Perhaps he could offer to accept a well publicized retraction and appoligy as a settlement.
Or argue with the manager, loudly, in the lobby, in front of lots of other people, untill he caves in and gives you a refund or exchange.
I agree completely, but I would replace "a refund or exchange" with "what you paid for".
It might be nice to throw in some threats, like registering a complaint with the BBB (very simple to do and very effective, at least in CA) or even suing them in Small Claims Court (also simple, if time consuming, in CA). A typical response to the later is something like "fine, you'll be hearing from our lawyers". Be prepared for that, with "There are no lawyers allowed in Small Claims, and if you don't show up you lose!" (again, in CA) My dad has used this to great effect on numerous occasions, even against huge corporations (his last victim was Earthlink, who tried to double-bill him).
Remember that these aren't empty threats, they are breaking the law. They gave you something other than what you paid for, and that's called "Fraud".
Why aren't the guys working on new medical breakthroughs profiled and given celebrity status? Or heck, the teachers who challenge children to reach beyond the classroom and expand their knowledge?
Because they're to busy actually doing something to invest all that time and effort on self-promotion. Those teachers and Doctors don't have time to sit down and chat with Larry King.
Britney Spears does, in fact, arguably, that's her job. Singing is a distant second (or even third, after cheerleader-style choreography) to promotion for a carreer such as hers.
You're not that abnormal. My experience was exactly the same, and I have quite a few friends with similar experiences.
I aced every test in every subject, but only on a few rare occasions did my GPA break 3.0. My sister was my polar opposite, completing every bit of work assigned to her. She graduated with something over 4.0, one of about 15 in her class of 500+ to do so.
Of course 10 years later I can still remember, for example, my Trig identities. She can't, and it's only been 7 years for her. Which of us actually learned something?
Slashdot Mirror
What I don't understand is why doesn't anybody make an extendable player, where the user can add support for additional codecs via third party plugins?
Because they'd have to add more memory for that, with dubious benefits. The vast majority of compressed music out there is still mp3. There isn't anything you can get in another codec that you can't get in mp3, so it really isn't worth the added expense, difficulty, and battery drain to have such a feature.
When Dow bought UC, they bought their messes too, just like if you marry someone with bad credit.
Interesting point about the Indian government, though.
Adobe is equally evil, just not as big.
Users care about what they are trying to do, not how they are doing it.
I don't think that's true at all. Users do care how they are doing it.
Have you ever tried to sell OpenOffice to a business? (I mean sell as in convince them to use, not as in charge money for it) I have.
It was a small sheet metal company. They had a couple of old Macs (pre-PPC) and an old windows box for running AutoCAD. They wanted a network with 7 PCs (2 for the shop, 4 for the office, 1 CAD station) and a file server. This was a very small company and very price conscious, but when I mentioned they could save over $1000 (about 15%) by using OpenOffice instead of MS Office they looked like deer caught in headlights, despite all my assurances that OpenOffice would easily fill all their needs (and yes, it really would have. I was moonlighting and my company worked very close with the company in question, and I took the project on as a favor to my boss, who was very good friends with the owner of said company).
This company didn't have any vested interest in MS Office, yet they couldn't imagine not using it, since that's what everybody else was using.
Never underestimate the power of Brand. Yeah, people care mostly about what they are doing, but god forbid they should be doing it a different way than everyone else.
Computers should be used as a tool to teach math, not as a tool to teach Computers. ...
And before some fool comes and says "You dont know math if you use a calculator, you dont know math is you use a computer"
Theres a difference between knowing math, and knowing how to work with numbers, number crunching is not knowing math.
Math is a language, and as such syntax and concepts must be treated as inseperable if you expect students to actually be able to use it. The best way to learn syntax is through repetition, and that means number crunching.
Are you suggesting that grammar shouldn't be taught in English classes? That's the equivalent of what your are suggesting for math.
That said, the current mode of thought in grade schools math education is very much like yours. My little brother (now 12) has been allowed to use a calculator in class for several years now, even on tests. Guess what? He doesn't understand math at all. How do you understand fractions when you don't understand how division works?
The fundamental problem is GIGO (old school computer term, Garbage In, Garbage Out for those to young to be familiar with it). It goes like this:
1) Student buttons on calculator
2) Calculator gives answer
3) Student writes answer on paper and hands it in
That's all well and good as long as the student entered everything into the calculator correctly. The problem occurs when the student makes a mistake, and for someone like my brother, who has basically never had to do math by hand, there is no reason to question the results. If the calculator tells him 9 * 9 = 18, that's what he'll write down.
That's the problem at lower grade levels, but it becomes far worse once they get to more complex subjects. You end up with students who got 'A's in math all through high school, but they're totally lost when they start taking Calculus because they don't understand how the fundamental operations work. They don't understand how they work because that was always done for them by their calculator.
Memorizing multiplication tables isn't just busy work, it teaches muliplication using concrete examples, and provides a necessary link to more basic teaching methods if needed (9 piles containing 9 beans each gives a total of 81 beans, and any child who knows how to count can verify and understand that).
I was a college math tutor for 2 years, and around half of my students were exactly what I describe above (the other half were older people going back to school who had forgotten everything since they took algebra 15 years ago). It's very sad to see an 'A' student needing a calculator to multiply by tens. Not only does it mean they don't understand multiplication, but that they don't understand how the number system works at all.
Teachers today treat Computers like they are mysterious
Teachers treat a lot of things as mysterious, especially anything math related. The root of the problem there, IMHO, is that there is essentially no math requirement for grade school teachers. How can someone who doesn't understand math themselves teach it effectively? We wouldn't let someone who didn't speak Spanish teach Spanish, so why do we let people who don't know math teach math?
If you don't understand math, you're not really going to understand computers (or the bulk of the sciences for that matter, which is a much larger issue).
spend too much time teaching "Computers" instead of using Computers to teach everything else.
I'd say exactly the opposite. Not everyone has access to a computer outside of school, and those are exactly the people who need to learn how to use one. I think it would do far more harm than good to take that away.
Similarly, there is very little benefit to using computers in a traditional classroom environment. There are educational programs that can be effective, we had one for algebra at the JC I tutored for, but they aren't good for everyone, and they seem to mostly be targetted at those who just needed to get it out of the way for their GE requirements than someone who intended to go on to more advanced maths.
I think it's possible to have a successful computer-based program, but the key is to make sure it's the student doing the work, not the machine.
There's a basic truth there that I didn't understand until I became a tutor: the more the student has to do by hand, the better they will understand what they're doing. The first thing I would do with a student who was really struggling with concepts was make them put their calculator away. The results were almost magical.
A web connected Tablet connected to everyones desk would be far more efficient than notebooks and the current tools, and a smartboard is far more efficient than a chalk board.
More efficient for what? Not for learning. Writing notes down by hand reinforces memory by involving the sense of touch. The more senses are involved, the more likely you are to remember something.
Just like a calculator is far more efficient than Pen and Paper, you can learn math just fine with just a calculator, you can learn math with a computer.
A calculator is more efficient for doing math, but is an obstacle to learning math. Students don't learn math when the work is done for them. Period.
The only reason a computer would useful for teaching math is because it can be programmed not to do the work for the student.
And before some fool comes and says "You dont know math if you use a calculator, you dont know math is you use a computer"
Theres a difference between knowing math, and knowing how to work with numbers, number crunching is not knowing math.
For those who know math a calculator is a tool, and a very useful one. For those who don't know math a calculator is a crutch, and a dangerous one. A calculator can't teach you math, and you can't learn math when all the work is being done for you.
This story is important to publishers of books and magazines, and also the writers and journalists who provide their content, who are no longer the primary source of information for most people. They assume that the rest of us care for the same reason /.ers think everyone else cares that there's a new security patch for IE: because it's terribly important to them.
When it comes down to it though, it really is a fundamental shift in the way Americans access information, and there are good reasons for it. There is a lot of information out there that simply can't be found otherwise. Remember the 1-800-DENTIST commercials from a few years back? It was a number you could call to get a recomendation for a dentist and they supposedly would supply you with all sorts of information about that dentist. I don't remember a similar service for doctors, or mechanics, so where would you go to find that information?
The reason teachers still recommend books, though, has very little to do with finding relevant information, which generally isn't difficult in a school research paper scenario. The difficulty is in finding reliable information, which the internet really isn't that good at. At least with books it's reasonable to assume that there has been some review and verification of the information provided, and that just isn't true on the net.
I'm just a technician, but every working EE and 95% of working Programmers I know are considerably older than 29.
Maybe it really is that bad in places like San Jose, I don't know. If so, then it's time to do something about the H1-B situation, and that means Unions. I know that's an unpopular concept among the high tech crowd, but sometimes it's the only way to protect yourself.
Interactive Television
One word for you: Tivo.
What? In what way is a Tivo "interactive Television"?
The correct answer here would be "Internet". That would also be the correct answer to the Video Phone question as well. The only thing those camera phones bring to the eqution is mobility, and even that is questionable since there have been laptops with built-in cameras for a few years now.
Tivo is interactive television the same way that cuddling is a contact sport.
Do a Google search for some of the famous European salt mines, and pick a name you like.
The burden is on the media to present an accurate story. I don't think that NASA should expend time and energy to refute the crackpots themselves, but should make sure that they are available and helpful to any journalists investigating these theories.
You must have a very simple site layout, then.
That is exactly the point of my analogy. Thank you for noticing it.
I predict that MS will do similar things with XML.
Linux World review
Game homepage
It's an FPS, it currently runs on Win32 and Linux (including ppc). It's at the early beta stage (current version is something like 0.3) but already very playable, and it's been reasonably stable for me on SuSE 8.0 with the stock kernel. YMMV, obviously. It's also Open Source.
The graphics still need some work, but I'm getting up to 300fps on a 700MHz Athlon with 384M RAM and a GeForce 2 GTS, so it should run fine on all of your machines. I haven't tried multiplayer yet, so I'm not sure if that works as well as the single player.
I thought OS X 10.2 was jaguar, which would make the "for jaguar" redundant (never mind that X and 10 thing).
I don't mean this a flamebait, I'm actually curious if Jaguar is something distinct from anything else 10.2
That's the only explanation for this article: I've fallen asleep at work and my manager is sneeking up behind me with an air horn or something...
I'll wait a few days for the retractions and such before I get excited about this. If it's true, though, it is good news.
No because the dtd and/or namespace will have to be referenced in plain text in the xml document. so, even if they use absurdly complex element names, they have to use a valid dtd or namespace uri which can be easily referenced
I think an analogy to Frontpage is appropriate here. Sure, it produces HTML, but the result just doesn't look right unless it's viewed in IE. Maybe the dtd is referenced, but encrypted or otherwise proprietary. Maybe MSXMLVIEWER (whatever it may be called) doesn't need the reference to be in plain text.
There are any number of things MS could do to ensure that the document just doesn't look right in other viewers. Since formatting is the whole point of XML, people will use MSXMLVIEWER and whatever it reads will be the de facto XML standard, just like whatever IE renders is the de facto HTML standard.
or it just ain't xml at all.
While technically correct, the point is sadly irrelevant. As long as MS is effectively a monopoly XML will be whatever they say it is, for the majority of people.
Also you aren't allowed to put binary data in an xml document
Not true. It's recomended that you don't put binary in an XML document, but nothing prevents you from doing so. This is exactly what will give MS the ability to hijack the standard.
In conclusion they would have to break xml pretty hard-core in order to make their doc types proprietary.
Only in spirit, I'm afraid, but that will likely be enough.
Besides, then what would be the point of going xml in the first place?
To make documents searchable. This is an ability which is extremely valuable to anyone who has a large amount of information they need to access. The upshot is that the actual content will likely be plain text, though important markups may not be. Sadly, format is more important than content for a lot of people.
Of course, most people won't use the XML format at all, since it won't be the default.
Sadly, most computer equipment isn't even designed for a three year lifespan
I don't know where you've been getting your hardware, but I've got several computers ranging in age from 4-15 years, all of which work just fine. Of course, nobody wants to use them, so who cares?
I'd be much more willing to buy CD's if they were not insanely expensive.
;-)
Most people would, and that point has already been proven with VHS. I remember back in the '80s when getting a movie on VHS could run as high as $80, everybody and their third uncle had a shelf full blank tapes that they'd copied 2-3 movies that they'd rented onto. Priacy was rampant, and nobody felt even the tiniest bit of guilt about it.
Who pirates VHS now? Nobody I know. Why bother when you can just buy a new copy, cover art and all, for $10?
About 10 years ago there was a small store in my town that sold new CDs for $8-13, and they did pretty brisk business. Granted, they mostly carried indie stuff, but for 8 bucks I'm willing to check out a band I've never heard of, and in fact I did quite frequently. I even found a few that I liked!
The funny thing is, I have no problem dropping $40 for 4 or 5 CDs, but at $20 each there's an even chance that I won't buy 1, even though I've got that same $40 in my pocket.
What the RIAA needs to realize is that piracy is the dark side of supply and demand. If they price their stuff too high, piracy kicks in to bring the average price down to where it should be. If they dropped the price of a CD by $5, they would easily make up what they'd lose per individual sale through volume, as it becomes less worthwhile to pirate and more attractive to try something new.
You can't legislate your way out of the Law of Supply and Demand any more than you can legislate yourself out of the Law of Gravity.
I should note that the store I mentioned above didn't go out of business because they weren't making enough money. The building owner decided they really wanted a hair salon there (which failed in short order) and the guy who owned the store moved to the Bay Area (IIRC). The hair salon idea was fueled by the repeated attempts to keep local kids from being visible to the tourists, since my town labors under the delusion that it's economy is dependent on tourism (easily proven false, but there's no need to go into that here).
The best you could hope for with digital data is to burn it to CD-R (not CD-RW) and mail it to yourself. Doing this once a month should be sufficient. leave the envelopes sealed, as that's the only timestamp you'll have that will stand up in court.
The problem is that it's so easy to alter digital data. If it's stored on a medium that's writable, it can be changed. CD-R is in theory not writable, but you can alter the date that's burned on the CD fairly easily, making it quite simple to falsify, and therefore creating the need to verify the date the CD was burned. The USPS is the cheapest and easiest way to do this.
If I were a judge, I would never accept a digital timestamp as proof. If I were a lawyer opposing you, the first thing I'd do is bring in someone to explain to the court all the reasons digital data can't be trusted.
If this is actually important to you, you don't want to be the test case for this type of timestamp.
Now if only computer manufacturers could make equipment even remotely this sturdy.
Who says they don't? I'd say that the fact that you won't be using the same computer 30 years from now has very little to do with reliability. In which case, why bother designing for a 30 year lifespan?
Chances are good that the girl's parents aren't loaded, so it isn't likely that he'll get much more than a six figure settlement, and even that is probably pushing it.
All the more reason to pursue it, I say. It's one thing to get a slap on the wrist and maybe feel a little guilty for ruining some guys life and career, it's another thing to have your lie bring your entire family to financial ruin or put yourself in debt for well into the forseeable future.
The fact that the mother was so hot to keep pressing charges even after the girl admitted it was all a lie means she needs to get smacked down too.
The point of punitive damages is not that the victim is set for life, but rather that the perptrator is punished.
Perhaps he could offer to accept a well publicized retraction and appoligy as a settlement.
Or argue with the manager, loudly, in the lobby, in front of lots of other people, untill he caves in and gives you a refund or exchange.
I agree completely, but I would replace "a refund or exchange" with "what you paid for".
It might be nice to throw in some threats, like registering a complaint with the BBB (very simple to do and very effective, at least in CA) or even suing them in Small Claims Court (also simple, if time consuming, in CA). A typical response to the later is something like "fine, you'll be hearing from our lawyers". Be prepared for that, with "There are no lawyers allowed in Small Claims, and if you don't show up you lose!" (again, in CA) My dad has used this to great effect on numerous occasions, even against huge corporations (his last victim was Earthlink, who tried to double-bill him).
Remember that these aren't empty threats, they are breaking the law. They gave you something other than what you paid for, and that's called "Fraud".
Pretend donations to govt. count more than votes on election day.
I'd like to see you dispute that based on available evidence.
Claim intellectual property is not property, and free to whoever can get his hands on it.
Intellectual Property is a legal fabrication, not a natural right.
Why aren't the guys working on new medical breakthroughs profiled and given celebrity status? Or heck, the teachers who challenge children to reach beyond the classroom and expand their knowledge?
Because they're to busy actually doing something to invest all that time and effort on self-promotion. Those teachers and Doctors don't have time to sit down and chat with Larry King.
Britney Spears does, in fact, arguably, that's her job. Singing is a distant second (or even third, after cheerleader-style choreography) to promotion for a carreer such as hers.
You're not that abnormal. My experience was exactly the same, and I have quite a few friends with similar experiences.
I aced every test in every subject, but only on a few rare occasions did my GPA break 3.0. My sister was my polar opposite, completing every bit of work assigned to her. She graduated with something over 4.0, one of about 15 in her class of 500+ to do so.
Of course 10 years later I can still remember, for example, my Trig identities. She can't, and it's only been 7 years for her. Which of us actually learned something?