If they used notebook HDs instead of the 3.5" 750GB ones, they'd get about 10% the storage density per host, 50% the price performance per GB, but much better power efficiency per GB
That isn't even remotely your only problems.
2.5" drives aren't as fast as their larger desktop counterparts. They also aren't as reliable, when put under heavy usage.
Those aren't the kinds of things most companies want to trade to get their power costs down.
but this way the record company gets what they want (money)
Ad-supported websites haven't exactly been raking in the dough.
and the consumer gets free (of cost) music.
...that they aren't allowed to do ANYTHING with.
With TV and radio stations spending 1/3rd of their airtime on commercials, it's questionable if people will put up with the number of ads the RIAA is going to need to fund this idea.
The idea has potential, but I'm not exactly optomistic.
I wasn't going to refute your point at all, actually, but since you insist...
Listen to the radio or watch TV.
And how about downloading a song you heard on the radio, or a show you watched on TV?
You're not entitled to anything.
Actually, this is completely untrue. Copyright is an artifical construction, explicitly expressed in The Constitution as being for the benefit of society (not the creator, not inherent right, etc.). At the point society decides copyright isn't enough of a benefit anymore, it's gone, and this becomes 100% legal.
Also, you're assuming that people download stuff out of financial necessity. Most don't.
Prove it. Your assumptions aren't evidence of anything.
And now:
It's a useful shorthand for "acquire through copyright infringement".
How does "stealing" more accurately reflect the above, than "copying" would? If you would have answered in the first place (instead of complaining that I shouldn't discuss the point you explicitly brought up), I wouldn't have to ask again.
I've been selling and servicing PC's for 11 years now and never once has power consumption or environmentally friendly disposal been a factor in the purchase decision.
You must not be in California.
Here, both are big issues.
Power is a real issue. Electricity is expensive... Air conditioning is expensive...
Environmental standards are very high. Recent laws forbid dumping electronics. Proper "household hazardous waste" disposal is free and pretty easy. The cities regularly have promotion programs (eg. CRT drives).
Nobody who wants a Mac is going to switch and buy a PC because they had a low green score.
Well, they might because of "battery life", or "fan noise". Just because they don't say "I want to save the planet" doesn't mean they don't care about the same issues.
I think that the "green" streak is being fed by a small by vocal minority.
Yes, a small and vocal 49% minority. AKA "Blue States".
Of course I'm being facetious, but the fact that you don't have many people in your neighborhood that care, doesn't count for much.
I play a game in Finnish offices where if I want to carry on working after 9pm, I have to jump up and run around the office every five minutes, otherwise the lights go out to save energy.
You're not exactly making it (being "green") sound practical...
Though this could be a good employee weight-loss program...
rendering it as a black nothingness for those of us surfing with javascript disabled.
Umm, I have javascript disabled (Firefox 1.5.x), and can still read the text of the page just fine.
The "SUBSCIBE" link is non-functional due to being dependant on js, but that's about it.
Re:Confusion About Abbie Hoffman
on
Steal This Film
·
· Score: 1
It's impossible to create an "unbiased" work; I think this is mathematical fact, in the highest sense of the term, not a mere rhetorical point.
You're talking past the point. Nobody (else) says "unbiased" and means mathematical bias.
Your blog entry there is just a straw man. You go through explaining how mathematical bias is inherent (shapes, categories, etc.), and then jump to the conclusion that unbiased reporting (covering both sides fairly--something COMPLETELY different) is therefore impossible.
Re:Confusion About Abbie Hoffman
on
Steal This Film
·
· Score: 1
Why would a film maker make a documentary if he wasn't trying to say something with it?
Umm... Perhaps informing someone of something they have likely never heard about... Perhaps trying to give an issue a fair representation, where too commonly only one side is given voice...
Conversely, would you believe a documetnary where the author didnt come to some loose conclusion at the end?
A conclusion can be "This side has some points, and the other side has some points too."
(I expect the usual hundred responses talking about how "copyright infringement isn't stealing", and it isn't. I know that. It's just a useful shorthand. Give it a rest.)
Is rental an unenforceable, and thus obsolete, business model?
'rental' (as you describe it) was never enforcable. The technology to copy something has always been available.
VCRs were a bit too expensive in the very beginning for most people to have two of them, but that changed quickly. As macrovision was introduced, so were dual-deck VCRs which simply copied the macrovision, and later video cleaners work as well.
What's more... It's legal to do, anyhow.
Or will companies simply accept the "shrinkage"?
They have in the past, why would they change now? If their margins are so thin that this will make a dent, they had other problems to start with.
It may turn out that simply adapting to the changing climate is an easier proposition in the long run.
That's easy for people in colder climates to say. In the deserts though, a few more degrees will make a large percentage of the land-mass of the earth absolutely unlivable...
If this turns out to be completely natural, then it casts doubt onto whether or not there's much we can do about it
That seems to be the whole crux of your argument, and it's just not true. Covering a few square miles of desert with mirrored-surfaces will make a big difference. For an example of the inverse of this, see Urban Heatsink Effect.
NOW Before all the goddam whiners start barking about liablity, and poisioning and the like remmeber theis was MY lunch meant to be eaten or discarded my ME, and it was STOLEN.
Just recently heard the story of a guy who rigged up a shotgun to his door, so it would fire if anyone broke-in while he was sleeping inside.
Now, of course, it was HIS house, meant to be entered by HIM.
When a burglar broke in, and was shot (not seriously) the guy who rigged it up was arrested, and charged with assault.
Just because you're upset, and you think punishing someone is justified, doesn't mean it's not going to result in you spending years in jail. You should be damn happy the person thought it was accidental, and you got away with it.
So which department is most likely to steal a lunch?
Accounting, Buffini said, drawing on his experience with personality traits at work.
Well, I guess if the Buffini believes it, it must be true.
Dear/. editors,
There is a TON of crap on the web that just happens to mention IT in one way or another. That doesn't mean you have to post it all here. I want that 2 minutes of my life back.
To think we're so fucking important as to be put on a pedestal over the other life forms on earth is just ridiculously egotistical.
Yes. Everyone should stop movement of any kind. Every time you move, you kill thousands of spores... It's like you're comitting mass murder just by living.
And animals everywhere kill thousands of other animals every second, but it's wrong if we do it... Oh yes.
Oh yeah, and plants are life too, and don't forget the many insects that are killed by harvesting crops. So if you ever eat anything, you're a murder. I guess we can all stay perfectly still, and feed on our rightous indignation.
And if you sympathize with a monkey, you'd tend to look at a monkey-killer the way you'd look at a murder, and most people wouldn't hesitate too long about giving some hurt to a murderer.
Somewhere around 50% of the USA is pro-life, and yet only a handful have ever fire-bombed an abortion clinic. Strange that.
If a burglar breaks into your house and steal a sack of the counterfeit money you're printing then later gets caught and fingers you, the 4th Amendment doesn't apply.
The problem is, unless the police seize it from your poperty, it is worthless as evidence. It might be just enough to get a search warrant, but that's about it.
Now, if the government hires a burglar, that's a 4th Amendment no-no;
It doesn't have to be so explicit. Even implicit approval of someone else doing it, makes him a government agent.
Slashdot Mirror
Then please explain why I can't get a 750GB SCSI hard drive.
Troughput, and seriously reduced seek times (a huge deal on larger databases, CVS servers, etc.).
And absolutely everything on the planet is conditional upon "if setup in a [XYZ] that allows that."
That isn't even remotely your only problems.
2.5" drives aren't as fast as their larger desktop counterparts. They also aren't as reliable, when put under heavy usage.
Those aren't the kinds of things most companies want to trade to get their power costs down.
Intelligent people can disagree.
Who do you listen to when the Linux core developers argues with the FreeBSD core team?
Being highly knowledgable in an area doesn't give you a monopoly on the truth, or the ability to accurately predict the future.
What? You mean your computer doesn't have giant buttons and knobs? How do you use your binocular screen?
Ad-supported websites haven't exactly been raking in the dough.
With TV and radio stations spending 1/3rd of their airtime on commercials, it's questionable if people will put up with the number of ads the RIAA is going to need to fund this idea.
The idea has potential, but I'm not exactly optomistic.
And how about downloading a song you heard on the radio, or a show you watched on TV?
Actually, this is completely untrue. Copyright is an artifical construction, explicitly expressed in The Constitution as being for the benefit of society (not the creator, not inherent right, etc.). At the point society decides copyright isn't enough of a benefit anymore, it's gone, and this becomes 100% legal.
Prove it. Your assumptions aren't evidence of anything.
And now:
How does "stealing" more accurately reflect the above, than "copying" would? If you would have answered in the first place (instead of complaining that I shouldn't discuss the point you explicitly brought up), I wouldn't have to ask again.
You must not be in California.
Here, both are big issues.
Power is a real issue.
Electricity is expensive...
Air conditioning is expensive...
Environmental standards are very high.
Recent laws forbid dumping electronics.
Proper "household hazardous waste" disposal is free and pretty easy.
The cities regularly have promotion programs (eg. CRT drives).
Well, they might because of "battery life", or "fan noise". Just because they don't say "I want to save the planet" doesn't mean they don't care about the same issues.
Yes, a small and vocal 49% minority. AKA "Blue States".
Of course I'm being facetious, but the fact that you don't have many people in your neighborhood that care, doesn't count for much.
You're not exactly making it (being "green") sound practical...
Though this could be a good employee weight-loss program...
Umm, I have javascript disabled (Firefox 1.5.x), and can still read the text of the page just fine.
The "SUBSCIBE" link is non-functional due to being dependant on js, but that's about it.
You're talking past the point. Nobody (else) says "unbiased" and means mathematical bias.
Your blog entry there is just a straw man. You go through explaining how mathematical bias is inherent (shapes, categories, etc.), and then jump to the conclusion that unbiased reporting (covering both sides fairly--something COMPLETELY different) is therefore impossible.
Umm... Perhaps informing someone of something they have likely never heard about... Perhaps trying to give an issue a fair representation, where too commonly only one side is given voice...
A conclusion can be "This side has some points, and the other side has some points too."
"steal" is a useful shorthand for "copy"?
'rental' (as you describe it) was never enforcable. The technology to copy something has always been available.
VCRs were a bit too expensive in the very beginning for most people to have two of them, but that changed quickly. As macrovision was introduced, so were dual-deck VCRs which simply copied the macrovision, and later video cleaners work as well.
What's more... It's legal to do, anyhow.
They have in the past, why would they change now? If their margins are so thin that this will make a dent, they had other problems to start with.
They have. This story is just about a nice user-friendly front-end to the program which has been around for months (drmdbg).
Yes, everyone knows this already.
The problems being that you do lose significant quality, and you have to do all this in realtime, which means very, very slowly.
Re-encoding the raw audio output is too much time and hassle for most people, so this is a huge improvement.
Besides, that trick doesn't work so well with video...
It was only 3am in your time-zone, not mine.
That's easy for people in colder climates to say. In the deserts though, a few more degrees will make a large percentage of the land-mass of the earth absolutely unlivable...
That seems to be the whole crux of your argument, and it's just not true. Covering a few square miles of desert with mirrored-surfaces will make a big difference. For an example of the inverse of this, see Urban Heatsink Effect.
Medication in excess of recomended dosages can commonly pose a serious risk of death. The GP said he was using a whole pack of laxative.
Just recently heard the story of a guy who rigged up a shotgun to his door, so it would fire if anyone broke-in while he was sleeping inside.
Now, of course, it was HIS house, meant to be entered by HIM.
When a burglar broke in, and was shot (not seriously) the guy who rigged it up was arrested, and charged with assault.
Just because you're upset, and you think punishing someone is justified, doesn't mean it's not going to result in you spending years in jail. You should be damn happy the person thought it was accidental, and you got away with it.
BTW, your nickname is quite apt.
Well, I guess if the Buffini believes it, it must be true.
Dear
There is a TON of crap on the web that just happens to mention IT in one way or another. That doesn't mean you have to post it all here. I want that 2 minutes of my life back.
It's a shame the mods don't have a sense of humor.
Yes. Everyone should stop movement of any kind. Every time you move, you kill thousands of spores... It's like you're comitting mass murder just by living.
And animals everywhere kill thousands of other animals every second, but it's wrong if we do it... Oh yes.
Oh yeah, and plants are life too, and don't forget the many insects that are killed by harvesting crops. So if you ever eat anything, you're a murder. I guess we can all stay perfectly still, and feed on our rightous indignation.
Somewhere around 50% of the USA is pro-life, and yet only a handful have ever fire-bombed an abortion clinic. Strange that.
Yes. I was recently watching a story about the Chinese government starting to shut-down bear farming.
They may not care anywhere near as much as the western world, but they do have standards.
The problem is, unless the police seize it from your poperty, it is worthless as evidence. It might be just enough to get a search warrant, but that's about it.
It doesn't have to be so explicit. Even implicit approval of someone else doing it, makes him a government agent.