Around 1988, I was in university and my roommate said, "you know they should just let everyone use and call it a day." I looked at him and replied, "huh? this is bad stuff and it should be stopped."
He replied, "you can't stop it, and will not be able to. You are constantly going to play cat and mouse, and the only ones that are going to be hurt are the honest brokers. So level the playing field and let them all take it." This was when one of the first scandals broke out.
I keep thinking about that comment (he went on to become an actuarial) and keep thinking that they now regulate athletes to the point where any slight deviation (even natural) is considered taking drugs.
Think about what is going to happen once DNA modifications come into play. What then?
I am not happy about this situation and would rather see a clean game, but it sort of seems futile. Look at Tour D'France? They have tried, tried, and tried yet again. What happens? Oh another scandal.
Finally a smart license... Open Source, but if you want binary or commercial, here are my terms... That lets the developer play nice with Open Source, but gives those that don't want to be nice to Open Source an avenue to buy, thus letting the developer playing nicer with Open Source...
Software programmers have a habit of fixing things that are not broke. The NYSE is literally handling billions of dollars per day. They can't, and I mean literally can't move to something else just because it does not have the latest and greatest feature. All the NYSE cares about is a working system... Sometimes I wish programmers and developers would keep that in mind.
And if there is a huge swell in trading the NYSE slows things down because the computers can't keep up. This actually happens quite often. I doubt that Windows, or Linux is faster. I think both have problems. What I think Linux buys them and this is what important, flexibility. They can tune the kernel to whatever suits their needs. They can't do that with Windows, and I could see that to be an issue with the NYSE. After all throughput is a major issue.
I like your comment "How even then he tried to cover his accent..."
Hmmm, he wants to blend in with the natives... I wonder why? hmmm, let's think on this one...
Oh yeah I got it, maybe because he was a spy?
I remember when Bush met Putin for the first time and said, "I looked the man in the eyes..."
At that point I thought, Bush, are you daft? The man in front of you was (is?) a spy and he would try to make himself appear like the Dali Lama himself...
I once asked a Russian when Putin was elected whether he was good or bad for the country. He replied, "does it matter?" I was completely surprised by this answer. He explained himself and said, "Mother Russia has always been ruled by an iron fist, and no politics whether communism, a tzar or free market will change that. Russia is one of the few places where a powerful person will drive over the shoes of a policeman, and the policeman will smile and say, "thank-you you are free to do that again""
Actually GMail is pretty good and I could see a decline in SPAM to gmail because I wonder if the SPAMMERS are realizing its futile.
Think about this. If GMail is really effective and blocks essentially all SPAM, why send them SPAM? Answer none, since it does cost something to send spam these days. Thus to optimize you avoid sending to gmail.
I know I have noticed with my email server that there is a rotation. The spammers have stopped sending to many addresses and then try other addresses.
Thus the SPAM solution is to make SPAM detectors as effective as Gmail. This then leads to the question if google doesn't have a new business model. I know if Google could cut down the spam to an effective zero I would be one happy camper.
Don't you get my original gp point here? The point is that I can do this on Windows and I don't need to involve a compiler, patch, or what have you. Yet on Linux, I install, then install an install, and then I need to apply a patch. If you don't see the problem here then I think I found the problem on why desktop Linux will not fly.
This is nuts thinking. The real problem that we have now is that people are not paying for content anymore. In the good ol days of cassettes people were not as harsh because it was not epidemic. Sure the companies did not like it, but it was manageable. The Internet is not manageable (for good and bad) and that is the problem.
I skimmed the article, but have to say it is a silly argument because we always break the law with the following examples:
1) How many times do you speed? 2) Keep the extra change? 3) Take supplies from your office and used it at home?
People break the law EVERYDAY! You are only held responsible if it becomes extreme, epidemic, or just bad luck. Otherwise we just keep breaking the law, and the article is pointing out the obvious.
I am running VMWare 5.5. I tried to get it running on the latest Ubuntu distro, and the one before that. What happens is that it asks if I have a compiler handy in install.pl file. Then when it attempts to compile and one of the headers buggers up.
I tried using the prepared binary patches with Ubuntu, but they did not seem to work for me. The only thing that worked was to go back to an old Ubuntu version and then be done with it. AND not upgrade the Linux kernel.
I am tired of this. I am tired of needing a compiler installed. Tired of doing an installation of an installation. I just want it to be installed and running.
Now talking about getting VMWare to run on some random Linux distro. Actually I can expect that. I can install VMWare workstation on Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2003 server without any hassles whatsoever! I can't say that of Linux.
You keep thumping on the features. What about usability?
Here is one single little feature that I wish were fixed. I want to install VMWare on a Linux distro without having to need a compiler installed. I can do this on Windows, why not Linux?
For example I bought VMWare and I am forced to upgrade because my version is old, and something in the Linux headers has changed that needs a new patch to fix up. WTF... This is a prime reason why I have given up on Linux on the desktop. It just requires too much work even with VMWare.
1) Music and media will be DRM free.... 2) DVD's will come 6 months after the cinema...
Sorry, but I fail to see the problems... Actually I wish they had more of that elsewhere because then I could buy music without fear of it not playing on a certain device.
Oh wait I know what the problem is, you can't rip off anymore because P2P will be watched. And that means you MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE TO PAY for something...
Hmmm, do you really want this? Think hard about this... It's a slippery slope...
What you are referring to is breaking of network neutrality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality). ****** The principle of net neutrality and regulations designed to support the neutrality of the Internet have been subject to fierce debate in various forums. Since the early 2000s, advocates of net neutrality rules have warned of the danger that broadband providers will use their power over the "last mile" to block applications they oppose, and also to discriminate between content providers (e.g. websites, services, protocols), particularly competitors. ******
So if universities do priorization, why not corporations, why not ISP's?
Yeah I think they can't break the encryption, and not because they can't break the encryption itself. But if you read the article look at what it says.
>> Experts say Skype and other Voice over internet Protocol (VoIP) calling software are difficult to intercept because they work by breaking up voice data into small packets and switching them along thousands of router paths instead of a constant circuit between two parties, as with a traditional call.
That's the real problem. The packets are scattered all over the place and they can get a lock on the data. They probably can break the encryption but then they would only get piecemeal information sort like, "Plan "... " meet ".... " blow "... " place "... Which could mean "Plan A is to meet tomorrow and blow the place beside the train station... " OR "Plan to meet tomorrow at the new pub, and blow the old place like a pop stand." Same missing words, two entirely different meanings...
Interesting... You could develop an encryption where fifteen people talk and give pieces of the sentence and the meaning is only apparent when you piece everything together....
Now that is an interesting analogy. And I would argue it actually makes the argument for the gp. If mobile homes were that much better why are they not more common? Answer is value... And I think that is the point of the gp in that mobile data centers don't offer as much value as building your own data center.
Here are the issues I could see with a data center
1) Heating and cooling are more extreme than in a building. 2) Space since containers are fixed sizes and since this requires extreme management of temperature you are loosing more space. 3) Shock absorption will require special attention since a bump by anybody or anything could have ramifications.
Not to say that a portable data center would be a bad idea for certain sectors (oil drilling, etc) Though I don't see portable data centers being cheaper.
As a comparison. More people buy laptops, but I tend to buy more desktops because I need cheaper computing horsepower. I run simulations and a laptop that can handle what I need tends to cost 2 to 4 times the price of a desktop.
>That's just retarded. Good music is like good drugs - give them a free hit and they'll pay for more. If your statement had any validity, every band you hear on the radio would be in dire poverty, because the radio gives music away for free! If you want to have the entire Top 40 in MP3 format, free and legal, is to plug your radio into your sound card and sample a Top 40 station for a couple of hours while you're hitting that crack pipe I see from your comment you must always have handy, and then spend ten minutes cutting and pasting into separate.wav files and let the computer convert them.
The comment that ripping the Top 40 is free and legal is actually wrong. Yes it is mostly legal to copy and listen for personal purposes, but you can't redistribute it. People distribute this stuff and think it's ok, when its not! Each and every person has to listen and download for themselves.
The radio issue is a tricky one because the problem is that the quality of radio is digital and that means your music is near perfect. In the good ol days of radio this was not the case and people bought music because of that. People bought music because what they bought gave them full quality music.
> The RIAA isn't against P2P because they're afraid you'll download the latest RIAA dreck, they're afraid you'll download one of the far better indie bands, like it, and buy the CD. Face it, the twenty bucks I spend on two (or four) indie CDs is tewnty bucks I don't have for a Kiss CD. Selling MP3s (let alone renting crippled DRM WMA files) is a stupid business decision. MP3s should be seen as advertising.
BS, the RIAA is not afraid of that in the least. This is about money and business. The Indie bands are not a dent. If Indie bands were a threat they would have been many many moons ago. The reality is that folks have taken it as a sport to rip off and not pay. Let's say that Indie bands were a threat, well the labels would have signed them up a long time ago.
Think about this. Would a label boycott a band because they were "Indie?" Maybe one, or two, but not an entire industry. If a label can make money with a band selling music they will sign them up and start selling music. This is about business and if the band would sell music a label somewhere would sign them up. After all there X thousand labels in the US alone.
>Yeah, paper's free and your photocopiers don't have coin slots. Yeah, you're going to stand in front of a photocopier (why not a scanner? Dumbass kids!) all week. Right. Which record label do you work for again?
Excuse me? Are you accusing me that I am lying? Then you actually don't know what the heck you are talking about. Engineering books cost about a hundred bucks a pop. For an entire semster (4 months) you are looking at around 1000 bucks of books. At the university I went to we had bulk photocopying cards which sold at around a 5 cents a sheet. Take a typically engineering book at 300 pages, and that makes 15 dollars. So do the math, 15 bucks or 100 bucks? There were enough folks who chose to photocopy. I didn't copy because I wanted to keep my books, which I still have 15 years later.
> I've noticed in my 55 years on this planet that people expect other people to be more or less like themselves. Honest people expect people to be honest, and thieves expect people to steal. I see which side of the fence you're on.
Hmmm, you call me a liar, and a thief? Interesting... Using your logic that means... Interesting...
>So tell me, why do bartenders and waiters make more money from tips than from the paycheck? There are very few people with the attitude you are talking about. Most people are more than willing to pay for what they get. Give them something free and they're even happier to pay for more of it; gratitude goes a long way. So does resentment.
Really? What country do you live in? You see in your country yes bartenders and waiters make more money with tips. Not in my country or continent. You are using blanket logic and that is wrong. The trick is to see multiple perspectives and then make an assessment.
1) Many artists these days are not the quality that one would expect. THOUGH, and this is a big THOUGH... There were plenty of garbage artists in the 80's, and 70's. You just don't hear about them now. Case in point Twisted Sister... I never did get that. Twisted Sister is an example of a band that was marketed with no talent.
2) People don't buy music because they can rip it off somebody for cheaper. The reality is that if you can get for free you will not pay for it. And this is the case in college or university. I remember people used to photocopy entire text books because they were too cheap to buy the text book. Thus I can very easily see students not paying for music.
Combine this with a general attitude of "we don't want to pay for anything" and you get a serious revenue problem.
I actually don't believe the argument that if you have quality you will buy it. Take the Radio Head example. It's not a business model, point blank! Gene Simmons was a bit harsh in his metaphor. But the problem is that I doubt it covers enough to make a living. There was an author who gave away his book "in the spirit" of community. Well his latest book is not completely available anymore in free format. Why? Easy because people were not buying his book and his sales were hurting. And this is the irony. Somebody tries to do a good thing, and what happens? He gets kicked in the teeth.
So in the end Gene Simmons is correct! Content costs....
I also think that MIT is wrong in this one. Architects have some engineering (they are required to study the basics), but in this case with things way out there the engineers should have had the final say. Of course in the heat of the moment as one other poster said, "they were more amusing with shiny things."
> So what do you do if the power goes out? Your laptop runs on batteries; does the projector?
The liklihood of power going completely out such that a projector cannot be powered are quite a bit less than an Internet going dead. Or worse just slow. Ever tried giving a presentation when the network requires say 10 secs to load a slide? That's dead time.
>What do you do if your laptop's hard drive dies? Or your RAM slowly starts to go bad?
Been there done that, have a backup pen USB device. And if that dies have backup materials on a second drive.
If my computer goes dead the conference ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS has a second computer that you can use on a temporary basis. And if the computer dies you buy another computer. I have had a computer die and I went to a super store and bought a new one. The conference was nice in that they drove and helped me get everything I needed. Some speakers even carry around two notebooks.
>Hell, what if your video card does this thing my old ATI started to do -- as it overheats, slowly start having a random checkerboard effect in various onscreen elements?
If it is a slow dying of the device then you don't take the device. I am not kidding here. If my notebook shows any signs of flakiness it's gone! I don't ever take it, and buy a new notebook.
>I'll acknowledge that most Internet is less reliable than a given hard drive, but I think it's gotten to where it's reliable enough. After all, if you wanted the best possible reliability, you'd use a dedicated device with a video out, a couple USB ports, and some flash, not a full computer.
No the Internet at conferences and places is not reliable! It is flaky, and what is even WORSE is that it is often slow... When you are giving a talk in a room of people many will be using their notebooks and at that time the network is often the slowest in the room where you are giving the talk.
This reliablity problem does not need to be. Conferences could fork over more money for more bandwidth and conference halls can charge less for Internet access. Internet access costs are outrageous! And the thing is that the conference must use the facilities of the conference hall. They cannot bring in their own pipe, or use their own external Wireless. Part of this problem is because these days everybody carries notebooks with WiFi. As a speaker it is actually more reliable (slightly) to use a cellular network.
Really, are you willing to stake your presentation on it?
I actually do give presentations and if things can go wrong they will. Thus I would never trust an online connection. ESPECIALLY now with all conferences having WiFi and attendees having notebooks the Internet comes to a crawl...
Does it not depend on what "peace activists" do? I agree some are peaceful.
If you get arrested you got arrested. It might not have been a fair arrest and there should be a process to explain yourself and get past the authorities. BUT, and this is the big BUT how is the border person going to know the difference? There are peace activists that should not be put on the list and then there are some that should be on the list and then some.
If anything there should be a process to talk about these sorts of things.
How many labels are there in the US? Thousands... So what is your problem? Is there price fixing? Maybe, but then again thousands of labels seem to be going along with it. Sure some charge less, some charge more.
BUT, maybe, just MAYBE.... The price that you are charged is the optimium price? Maybe it does cost quite a bit of money to market, and bring content to the consumer. Maybe artists are struggling EVEN with today's prices...
Zucker has the right to say what he wants. After all Zucker is in charge of creating content.
I think Apple has a nice scam running. They overcharge for their devices because it is "cool." And then they stick it to the content providers so that their overpriced devices have cheap content.
The difference with DVD's is that the content providers can charge what they want. They can charge according to their and the market's needs. I am sure that the content providers have a nice and neat formula that allows them to maximize profits. Whereas the Apple formula is geared towards the maximization of Apple's profits and not the content providers. A clear conflict!
I am not saying that Zucker is an angel because the content providers have not been. What I am saying is that Apple should start creating their own content!
That is actually pretty darn reasonable... You can develop open source software and IF you make a buck then you need to pay some minor royalities.
Think of it as follows. TrollTech charges something like 3900 USD, which translates into a Microsoft revenue stream (assuming 0.4%) of about a million dollars. Trolltech has a small business of up 200,000. After that you pay full dollar. So Trolltech is charging profitable open source companies more than Microsoft...
Don't know about you, but this does make Mono attractive on Linux. Mono on Linux is pretty good, and on Windows.NET is the way to go. So once your company makes a million bucks you need to start forking 3900 total (not per developer) over some money to Microsoft. Fair deal actually...
Slashdot Mirror
Around 1988, I was in university and my roommate said, "you know they should just let everyone use and call it a day." I looked at him and replied, "huh? this is bad stuff and it should be stopped."
He replied, "you can't stop it, and will not be able to. You are constantly going to play cat and mouse, and the only ones that are going to be hurt are the honest brokers. So level the playing field and let them all take it." This was when one of the first scandals broke out.
I keep thinking about that comment (he went on to become an actuarial) and keep thinking that they now regulate athletes to the point where any slight deviation (even natural) is considered taking drugs.
Think about what is going to happen once DNA modifications come into play. What then?
I am not happy about this situation and would rather see a clean game, but it sort of seems futile. Look at Tour D'France? They have tried, tried, and tried yet again. What happens? Oh another scandal.
Finally a smart license... Open Source, but if you want binary or commercial, here are my terms... That lets the developer play nice with Open Source, but gives those that don't want to be nice to Open Source an avenue to buy, thus letting the developer playing nicer with Open Source...
Software programmers have a habit of fixing things that are not broke. The NYSE is literally handling billions of dollars per day. They can't, and I mean literally can't move to something else just because it does not have the latest and greatest feature. All the NYSE cares about is a working system... Sometimes I wish programmers and developers would keep that in mind.
Have not traded much have you?
http://www.cigital.com/paynereport/archive/jul-aug2001.php
And if there is a huge swell in trading the NYSE slows things down because the computers can't keep up. This actually happens quite often. I doubt that Windows, or Linux is faster. I think both have problems. What I think Linux buys them and this is what important, flexibility. They can tune the kernel to whatever suits their needs. They can't do that with Windows, and I could see that to be an issue with the NYSE. After all throughput is a major issue.
I like your comment "How even then he tried to cover his accent..."
Hmmm, he wants to blend in with the natives... I wonder why? hmmm, let's think on this one...
Oh yeah I got it, maybe because he was a spy?
I remember when Bush met Putin for the first time and said, "I looked the man in the eyes..."
At that point I thought, Bush, are you daft? The man in front of you was (is?) a spy and he would try to make himself appear like the Dali Lama himself...
I once asked a Russian when Putin was elected whether he was good or bad for the country. He replied, "does it matter?" I was completely surprised by this answer. He explained himself and said, "Mother Russia has always been ruled by an iron fist, and no politics whether communism, a tzar or free market will change that. Russia is one of the few places where a powerful person will drive over the shoes of a policeman, and the policeman will smile and say, "thank-you you are free to do that again""
Actually GMail is pretty good and I could see a decline in SPAM to gmail because I wonder if the SPAMMERS are realizing its futile.
Think about this. If GMail is really effective and blocks essentially all SPAM, why send them SPAM? Answer none, since it does cost something to send spam these days. Thus to optimize you avoid sending to gmail.
I know I have noticed with my email server that there is a rotation. The spammers have stopped sending to many addresses and then try other addresses.
Thus the SPAM solution is to make SPAM detectors as effective as Gmail. This then leads to the question if google doesn't have a new business model. I know if Google could cut down the spam to an effective zero I would be one happy camper.
I am running VMWare 5.5, which is not that old. I was trying to run Ubuntu which is not that unsupported. Where's the problem?
Don't you get my original gp point here? The point is that I can do this on Windows and I don't need to involve a compiler, patch, or what have you. Yet on Linux, I install, then install an install, and then I need to apply a patch. If you don't see the problem here then I think I found the problem on why desktop Linux will not fly.
This is nuts thinking. The real problem that we have now is that people are not paying for content anymore. In the good ol days of cassettes people were not as harsh because it was not epidemic. Sure the companies did not like it, but it was manageable. The Internet is not manageable (for good and bad) and that is the problem.
I skimmed the article, but have to say it is a silly argument because we always break the law with the following examples:
1) How many times do you speed?
2) Keep the extra change?
3) Take supplies from your office and used it at home?
People break the law EVERYDAY! You are only held responsible if it becomes extreme, epidemic, or just bad luck. Otherwise we just keep breaking the law, and the article is pointing out the obvious.
I am running VMWare 5.5. I tried to get it running on the latest Ubuntu distro, and the one before that. What happens is that it asks if I have a compiler handy in install.pl file. Then when it attempts to compile and one of the headers buggers up.
The problem is as follows:
http://www.debuntu.org/how-to-vmware-server-workstation-under-ubuntu-feisty
I tried using the prepared binary patches with Ubuntu, but they did not seem to work for me. The only thing that worked was to go back to an old Ubuntu version and then be done with it. AND not upgrade the Linux kernel.
I am tired of this. I am tired of needing a compiler installed. Tired of doing an installation of an installation. I just want it to be installed and running.
Now talking about getting VMWare to run on some random Linux distro. Actually I can expect that. I can install VMWare workstation on Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2003 server without any hassles whatsoever! I can't say that of Linux.
You keep thumping on the features. What about usability?
Here is one single little feature that I wish were fixed. I want to install VMWare on a Linux distro without having to need a compiler installed. I can do this on Windows, why not Linux?
For example I bought VMWare and I am forced to upgrade because my version is old, and something in the Linux headers has changed that needs a new patch to fix up. WTF... This is a prime reason why I have given up on Linux on the desktop. It just requires too much work even with VMWare.
Ok, here is the scoop...
1) Music and media will be DRM free....
2) DVD's will come 6 months after the cinema...
Sorry, but I fail to see the problems... Actually I wish they had more of that elsewhere because then I could buy music without fear of it not playing on a certain device.
Oh wait I know what the problem is, you can't rip off anymore because P2P will be watched. And that means you MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE TO PAY for something...
Hmmm, do you really want this? Think hard about this... It's a slippery slope...
What you are referring to is breaking of network neutrality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality).
******
The principle of net neutrality and regulations designed to support the neutrality of the Internet have been subject to fierce debate in various forums. Since the early 2000s, advocates of net neutrality rules have warned of the danger that broadband providers will use their power over the "last mile" to block applications they oppose, and also to discriminate between content providers (e.g. websites, services, protocols), particularly competitors.
******
So if universities do priorization, why not corporations, why not ISP's?
A slippery slope....
Yeah I think they can't break the encryption, and not because they can't break the encryption itself. But if you read the article look at what it says.
... " meet " .... " blow " ... " place "... Which could mean "Plan A is to meet tomorrow and blow the place beside the train station... " OR "Plan to meet tomorrow at the new pub, and blow the old place like a pop stand." Same missing words, two entirely different meanings...
>> Experts say Skype and other Voice over internet Protocol (VoIP) calling software are difficult to intercept because they work by breaking up voice data into small packets and switching them along thousands of router paths instead of a constant circuit between two parties, as with a traditional call.
That's the real problem. The packets are scattered all over the place and they can get a lock on the data. They probably can break the encryption but then they would only get piecemeal information sort like, "Plan "
Interesting... You could develop an encryption where fifteen people talk and give pieces of the sentence and the meaning is only apparent when you piece everything together....
Now that is an interesting analogy. And I would argue it actually makes the argument for the gp. If mobile homes were that much better why are they not more common? Answer is value... And I think that is the point of the gp in that mobile data centers don't offer as much value as building your own data center.
Here are the issues I could see with a data center
1) Heating and cooling are more extreme than in a building.
2) Space since containers are fixed sizes and since this requires extreme management of temperature you are loosing more space.
3) Shock absorption will require special attention since a bump by anybody or anything could have ramifications.
Not to say that a portable data center would be a bad idea for certain sectors (oil drilling, etc) Though I don't see portable data centers being cheaper.
As a comparison. More people buy laptops, but I tend to buy more desktops because I need cheaper computing horsepower. I run simulations and a laptop that can handle what I need tends to cost 2 to 4 times the price of a desktop.
>That's just retarded. Good music is like good drugs - give them a free hit and they'll pay for more. If your statement had any validity, every band you hear on the radio would be in dire poverty, because the radio gives music away for free! If you want to have the entire Top 40 in MP3 format, free and legal, is to plug your radio into your sound card and sample a Top 40 station for a couple of hours while you're hitting that crack pipe I see from your comment you must always have handy, and then spend ten minutes cutting and pasting into separate .wav files and let the computer convert them.
The comment that ripping the Top 40 is free and legal is actually wrong. Yes it is mostly legal to copy and listen for personal purposes, but you can't redistribute it. People distribute this stuff and think it's ok, when its not! Each and every person has to listen and download for themselves.
The radio issue is a tricky one because the problem is that the quality of radio is digital and that means your music is near perfect. In the good ol days of radio this was not the case and people bought music because of that. People bought music because what they bought gave them full quality music.
> The RIAA isn't against P2P because they're afraid you'll download the latest RIAA dreck, they're afraid you'll download one of the far better indie bands, like it, and buy the CD. Face it, the twenty bucks I spend on two (or four) indie CDs is tewnty bucks I don't have for a Kiss CD. Selling MP3s (let alone renting crippled DRM WMA files) is a stupid business decision. MP3s should be seen as advertising.
BS, the RIAA is not afraid of that in the least. This is about money and business. The Indie bands are not a dent. If Indie bands were a threat they would have been many many moons ago. The reality is that folks have taken it as a sport to rip off and not pay. Let's say that Indie bands were a threat, well the labels would have signed them up a long time ago.
Think about this. Would a label boycott a band because they were "Indie?" Maybe one, or two, but not an entire industry. If a label can make money with a band selling music they will sign them up and start selling music. This is about business and if the band would sell music a label somewhere would sign them up. After all there X thousand labels in the US alone.
>Yeah, paper's free and your photocopiers don't have coin slots. Yeah, you're going to stand in front of a photocopier (why not a scanner? Dumbass kids!) all week. Right. Which record label do you work for again?
Excuse me? Are you accusing me that I am lying? Then you actually don't know what the heck you are talking about. Engineering books cost about a hundred bucks a pop. For an entire semster (4 months) you are looking at around 1000 bucks of books. At the university I went to we had bulk photocopying cards which sold at around a 5 cents a sheet. Take a typically engineering book at 300 pages, and that makes 15 dollars. So do the math, 15 bucks or 100 bucks? There were enough folks who chose to photocopy. I didn't copy because I wanted to keep my books, which I still have 15 years later.
> I've noticed in my 55 years on this planet that people expect other people to be more or less like themselves. Honest people expect people to be honest, and thieves expect people to steal. I see which side of the fence you're on.
Hmmm, you call me a liar, and a thief? Interesting... Using your logic that means... Interesting...
>So tell me, why do bartenders and waiters make more money from tips than from the paycheck? There are very few people with the attitude you are talking about. Most people are more than willing to pay for what they get. Give them something free and they're even happier to pay for more of it; gratitude goes a long way. So does resentment.
Really? What country do you live in? You see in your country yes bartenders and waiters make more money with tips. Not in my country or continent. You are using blanket logic and that is wrong. The trick is to see multiple perspectives and then make an assessment.
Let's tone down Gene Simmon's argument...
1) Many artists these days are not the quality that one would expect. THOUGH, and this is a big THOUGH... There were plenty of garbage artists in the 80's, and 70's. You just don't hear about them now. Case in point Twisted Sister... I never did get that. Twisted Sister is an example of a band that was marketed with no talent.
2) People don't buy music because they can rip it off somebody for cheaper. The reality is that if you can get for free you will not pay for it. And this is the case in college or university. I remember people used to photocopy entire text books because they were too cheap to buy the text book. Thus I can very easily see students not paying for music.
Combine this with a general attitude of "we don't want to pay for anything" and you get a serious revenue problem.
I actually don't believe the argument that if you have quality you will buy it. Take the Radio Head example. It's not a business model, point blank! Gene Simmons was a bit harsh in his metaphor. But the problem is that I doubt it covers enough to make a living. There was an author who gave away his book "in the spirit" of community. Well his latest book is not completely available anymore in free format. Why? Easy because people were not buying his book and his sales were hurting. And this is the irony. Somebody tries to do a good thing, and what happens? He gets kicked in the teeth.
So in the end Gene Simmons is correct! Content costs....
Your comment should be moderated way up there.
I also think that MIT is wrong in this one. Architects have some engineering (they are required to study the basics), but in this case with things way out there the engineers should have had the final say. Of course in the heat of the moment as one other poster said, "they were more amusing with shiny things."
> So what do you do if the power goes out? Your laptop runs on batteries; does the projector?
The liklihood of power going completely out such that a projector cannot be powered are quite a bit less than an Internet going dead. Or worse just slow. Ever tried giving a presentation when the network requires say 10 secs to load a slide? That's dead time.
>What do you do if your laptop's hard drive dies? Or your RAM slowly starts to go bad?
Been there done that, have a backup pen USB device. And if that dies have backup materials on a second drive.
If my computer goes dead the conference ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS has a second computer that you can use on a temporary basis. And if the computer dies you buy another computer. I have had a computer die and I went to a super store and bought a new one. The conference was nice in that they drove and helped me get everything I needed. Some speakers even carry around two notebooks.
>Hell, what if your video card does this thing my old ATI started to do -- as it overheats, slowly start having a random checkerboard effect in various onscreen elements?
If it is a slow dying of the device then you don't take the device. I am not kidding here. If my notebook shows any signs of flakiness it's gone! I don't ever take it, and buy a new notebook.
>I'll acknowledge that most Internet is less reliable than a given hard drive, but I think it's gotten to where it's reliable enough. After all, if you wanted the best possible reliability, you'd use a dedicated device with a video out, a couple USB ports, and some flash, not a full computer.
No the Internet at conferences and places is not reliable! It is flaky, and what is even WORSE is that it is often slow... When you are giving a talk in a room of people many will be using their notebooks and at that time the network is often the slowest in the room where you are giving the talk.
This reliablity problem does not need to be. Conferences could fork over more money for more bandwidth and conference halls can charge less for Internet access. Internet access costs are outrageous! And the thing is that the conference must use the facilities of the conference hall. They cannot bring in their own pipe, or use their own external Wireless. Part of this problem is because these days everybody carries notebooks with WiFi. As a speaker it is actually more reliable (slightly) to use a cellular network.
Really, are you willing to stake your presentation on it?
I actually do give presentations and if things can go wrong they will. Thus I would never trust an online connection. ESPECIALLY now with all conferences having WiFi and attendees having notebooks the Internet comes to a crawl...
Does it not depend on what "peace activists" do? I agree some are peaceful.
If you get arrested you got arrested. It might not have been a fair arrest and there should be a process to explain yourself and get past the authorities. BUT, and this is the big BUT how is the border person going to know the difference? There are peace activists that should not be put on the list and then there are some that should be on the list and then some.
If anything there should be a process to talk about these sorts of things.
I hear this "Oh in ten years the labels would be wiped out." or "Because you will have wiped out an oligopoly that leaches from everybody."
Look at this database: http://www.1212.com/labels/usa/home.html
How many labels are there in the US? Thousands... So what is your problem? Is there price fixing? Maybe, but then again thousands of labels seem to be going along with it. Sure some charge less, some charge more.
BUT, maybe, just MAYBE.... The price that you are charged is the optimium price? Maybe it does cost quite a bit of money to market, and bring content to the consumer. Maybe artists are struggling EVEN with today's prices...
Zucker has the right to say what he wants. After all Zucker is in charge of creating content.
I think Apple has a nice scam running. They overcharge for their devices because it is "cool." And then they stick it to the content providers so that their overpriced devices have cheap content.
The difference with DVD's is that the content providers can charge what they want. They can charge according to their and the market's needs. I am sure that the content providers have a nice and neat formula that allows them to maximize profits. Whereas the Apple formula is geared towards the maximization of Apple's profits and not the content providers. A clear conflict!
I am not saying that Zucker is an angel because the content providers have not been. What I am saying is that Apple should start creating their own content!
Fair enough, so how do I develop a desktop application?
That is actually pretty darn reasonable... You can develop open source software and IF you make a buck then you need to pay some minor royalities.
.NET is the way to go. So once your company makes a million bucks you need to start forking 3900 total (not per developer) over some money to Microsoft. Fair deal actually...
Think of it as follows. TrollTech charges something like 3900 USD, which translates into a Microsoft revenue stream (assuming 0.4%) of about a million dollars. Trolltech has a small business of up 200,000. After that you pay full dollar. So Trolltech is charging profitable open source companies more than Microsoft...
Don't know about you, but this does make Mono attractive on Linux. Mono on Linux is pretty good, and on Windows