I'll assume this is RIAA propaganda pasted to slashdot, but WTH, I'll take first crack at debunking (sorry about the length):
>A typical music fan who buys a CD might use that CD at home, take that CD in the car, make a tape of that CD,
I thought the RIAA hated being able to "duplicate" music via taping. Doesn't seem right. And the idea of being able to use it in more than one place without licensing? Doesn't jive either.
>That's probably why most consumers, when asked, describe CDs as a good value.
Show me the proof.
>At the same time, when asked directly whether CDs cost too much, some consumers will say yes! Why the contradiction?
...Because your lame-ass biased study simply couldn't fudge the results enough to say otherwise legally? Again, not enough proof.
>While the RIAA does not collect information on the specific costs that make up the price of a CD
Must be hard to comment on the following then, huh?
>there are many factors that go into the overall cost of a CD -- and the plastic it's pressed on, is among the least significant.
But you just said you knew nothing! You say one thing then the other. Even the government has a hard time contradicting itself in the same paragraph.
>Of course, the most important component of a CD is the artist's effort in developing that music.
Very wholeheartedly agreed.
>Artists receive royalties on each recording, which vary according to their contract, and the songwriter gets royalties too.
I don't know about you, but don't most bands write their own songs nowadays? It isn't like you go to the dime shop, buy some lyrics, and put music to them, right? So that's half that price gone.
>In addition, the label incurs additional costs in finding and signing new artists.
...And if they didn't do that they wouldn't be a label. They would be bankrupt. Face it: Labels MAKE their money with signed artists, so why complain?
>Once an artist or group has songs composed, they must then go into the studio and begin recording. The costs of recording this work, including recording studio fees, studio musicians, sound engineers, producers and others, all must be recovered by the cost of the CD.
Sure, I have no problem with that. Lets say this is real expensive, $100,000. Now a lot of albums that cost that amount sell 1,000,000 copies (albums that sell less aren't likely to have authors that can or labels willing to foot a big bill). That's $0.10 per copy.
>Then come marketing and promotion costs -- perhaps the most expensive part of the music business today.
You mean being played at NO cost on the radio isn't enough? You mean you have to advertise like everyone else? Holy s**t! Can you imagine the horror? That must be why my RadioShack phone cost $20... without that advertising it would be like $1 right? (no... advertising really shouldn't be the LARGEST concern in price [I would hope])
>For every album released in a given year, a marketing strategy was developed to make that album stand out among the other releases that hit the market that year. Art must be designed for the CD box, and promotional materials (posters, store displays and music videos) developed and produced.
Uhh, like again, no s**t. Without a "gimmick" you can't advertise. That's the way it works. Don't whine about it.
>For many artists, a costly concert tour is essential to promote their recordings.
From what I hear this is where most artists MAKE their money. Costly? Only for the people buying the tickets. If you aren't making enough to cover the cost of the concert, charge more. That's how everyone else works.
>Another factor commonly overlooked in assessing CD prices is to assume that all CDs are equally profitable. In fact, the vast majority is never profitable.
Again, agreed. That's how other things work, and have worked for years (books, magazines, movies come to mind). Deal with it. Books have by providing a "cheap" way to get a book (paperback). Time to provide a cheap alternative to CDs: The internet (where box art doesn't cost so much;-).
>Between 1983 and 1996, the average price of a CD fell by more than 40%.
I'm willing to bet the price of TVs has fallen a lot since 1940 too. Too bad no one had a TV in 1940 [and therefore they were a speciality item, costing $$$], and no one I knew had a CD player until *I* got one in 1988 (or so). Since 1988 the price at my local shops has increased by about 50%.
>If CD prices had risen at the same rate as consumer prices over this period, the average retail price of a CD in 1996 would have been $33.86 instead of $12.75.
Are you telling me that the $0.75 cokes in the vending machine cost $0.25 in 1983? According to my records the price index is NOT just under 3x 1983 prices.
And if you can find me a more then 20 CDs at a local shoppe for $12.75 in 1996 (hell, or even now) then I'll show you a liar.
>While the price of CDs has fallen, the amount of music provided on a typical CD has increased substantially...
Yes, now they offer 80 Min. CDs because of higher laser tolerances. This extra 6 minutes over a 74 Min. CD is "substantial". What would the amount of music you can put on a DVD equal? Would you even have a word for it?
>...along with higher quality in terms of fidelity...
You mean my CDs now have 24 bits resolution than 16, or they now sample at 52 kHz rather than 44.1 kHz? Change in fidelity == change in standard != the same old CD format. An out and out lie.
>...durability,...
Yes, now CDs are manufactured properly and don't get laser rot. Otherwise I wonder where the difference is (they have always been made from polycarbonate, right?). Thank you for making them properly. If you are charging me more for a working product, then you are screwing me over.
>...ease of use...
A total complete out and out amazingly STUPID lie. How has ease of use improved? The CD format has remained unchanged. To make it "easier" you would have to change the format, making it not work with CD players. ie: You don't have a CD.
(And if you think that you can get away with saying players are easier to use because of the RIAA, well, show me an RIAA brand CD player).
>...and range of choices, including multi-media material, such as music videos, interviews and discographies.
Wait up a minute here. When CDs were first produced there was less room for "cover" art and no "sleeve" art. Now you have a cheap way to fit these back in (as digital data on the CD) and you think that means you can charge MORE?
>Content of this type often requires considerable production expense and adds a whole new dimension that goes beyond conventional audio.
Yep. That's what I said. Use the extra room on the CD like you would the sleeve for the records you always used to make so "cheaply".
>In contrast, CD prices are low compared to other forms of entertainment and one of the few entertainment units to decrease in price...
Decrease in price? Over what period? Since their inception or in the last decade?
>...even though production, marketing and distribution costs have increased.
Life's a bitch, huh? Looks like you have everything against you. Consumers to buy your product. People who make it for you. Radio stations to play it for you. And then they go and slap this "inflation" tax deal on ya. What a bummer. I feel for ya.
Quoted from USA Today (are they still in business? I don't live in the US): "consumers don't seem to balk at the rising price of fun in this strong, family-friendly economy."
Sounds like something one might say during the Regan or Bush administration. What is the date of this mystery article anyways? And what person wrote it?
>The prices of other forms of entertainment have risen, on average, more rapidly than has music or consumer prices, with most admission prices for other forms of entertainment having increased more than 90% between 1983 and 1996.
You mean movie theaters? Yeah, they are a rip off. But they are STILL cheaper than a CD. And movies cost a hell of a lot more to make than a CD, and are a hell of a lot more likely to fail (In my B movie experience).
>By all measures, when you consider how long people have the music and how often they can go back and get "re-entertained" CDs truly are an incredible value for the money.
Can't agree. Proof? You have none, did I hear? Too bad.
I don't know what the US definition of public is, but in Canada and England (and, I would guess any English speaking country) it often means Governmental.
ie: Government facilities are required to accomodate the disabled.
So, in that case,.gov and (possibly).mil websites would all have to have alt tags... Other websites can say whatever they want, however they want (I believe your 1st amendment protects that right, or is it the 4th?).
And no, image maps and shockwave do NOT necessarialy have to go. I believe the ADA would say that the site has to be fully functional for a disabled user; This doesn't mean removing non-disabled extras that don't affect the funcitonality of the site. Otherwise the local town hall wouldn't have any steps. Instead they just add a ramp. Fully functional for the disabled user, and just as functional for the non-disabled.
>And no friggin frames.
That goes whether you are a public institution or not.:-)
Re:Feeble egalitarian "equal but different" logic.
on
Video Games and ADD
·
· Score: 1
>The best way to do that is to lower their social status until they can't get laid.
Who gets laid more often? A professional athelete, A construction worker, or a bookworm?
>How do you ever expect us to improve the human race if we don't breed out the most damaging weaknesses?
Ahh, but the human race's most damaging weakness is to be totally helpless. Assuming you have no major diseases, if you don't do any labour, or aren't athletic, or simply don't work out, you are likely a good candidate for a heart attack. Soon.
>Most small ISPs won't go for it.. they can't afford the loss of busness they'd get.
Heck, if the big ISPs made the deal with Sony (as you say, not likely) the small ISPs would benefit wildly. Anyone on one of the big firewalled ISPs will go elsewhere.
All the small ISP has to do is advertise "We don't firewall Napster" and BAM! instant business...:-)
I see. It's like tithing... where you give 10% of your money to church.
Well, I suggest that since many cable modems only upload at 128kbps (due to caps) and can download at up to 3Mbps, that is a total "tithe" of 4.3%
Ok. So I will do that on my modem connection. Let's say I'm lucky and get a 40kBps connection (which I never do). That means I should limit outgoing transfers to 1.72kbps. Ooooooooooh 172 bytes PER SECOND. Just under 6 hours a song! I'll be the nicest person on the block! Hey, at least I am giving, since if I don't do this I obviously have a heart of stone and never will ever give. And it is important that it comes from the heart. All 4.3% of it.
>You will always see people who slack.... but they are not the majority.
I've found people tend to slack MORE in an environment where the boss stifles their every move (no personal use of ANYTHING, etc...). People tend to just find the areas the boss never visits and spend as much time as they can there, doing what the hell they wanted to in the first place (but no work, since you can't do that much of it away from the desk in many jobs).
This, of course, separates the Normals from the Ass Kissers. The Ass Kissers are ALWAYS in the office, the Normals never stick about in that environment.
The rule? People have their own opinions, ideas, and reasons about the use of an office. The bosses job? To keep those in check with company policy without making people feel trapped. This is assuming reasonable company policy. Ahahah... yah, right.
>Best I can think of is running 4" PVC pipe from the utility room to the attic and then dropping cabling into the closet
Good idea, wrong pipe.:-) PVC will burn very quickly with friction. This will, of course, be introduced in a large way when you pull the pullstring attached to the wires. I've already seen SMOKING cable come out of long runs of pipe (where people forgot to put on cable lubricant, whoops). You might get away with it in a house though. But, to be safe, some ultra cheap, metal but non aluminum pipe would be best.
Pipe is nice because the curves on it are nicely rounded, making cable runs a cinch. Venting would suck since the cable would constantly get snagged on the corners during pulling.
>They are probably paying more than us modem users.
You know, I thought about that once, and realized it is CHEAPER for a heavy internet user to get high speed internet. Look at your costs (remember, heavy internet user): [BTW: This is in Canada, so $CAN]
-- $23/mo. second phone line.
-- $20 - $25/mo. service (decent service will cost).
My local DSL provider (well, local to the city, but won't give any DSL to me, crappy exchange, out in the country, lucky I didn't get stuck with a party line [still legal in Ontario, Canada]) charges $30 a month (goes up to $40 after 3 months).
Any way you look at it, DSL is cheaper than a phone line (here, in Canada). Since high-speed lines have ALWAYS been cheaper in the US, I assume your DSL is too (might be wrong though...).
>We're growing tired of you kids misapplying the GPL to tasks it was never intended to fulfill.
Hey, I didn't make the initial suggestion. I was just trying to point out the facts of free information. Many licenses, similar to the GPL, that better apply to the printed word can offer the same information as free speech. I am trying to discuss the spirit of freedom of speech, not necessarialy the GPL (although my post used it as an example).
I really don't care what you name your license, but if it gives people freedom, there is no limit as to what can be done with the information.
The fact is we wouldn't be as far as we are today without the freedom of basic information. Imagine not being able to know (legally) basic electricity or basic chemistry and you'll see what I am talking about.
>Let's GPL puppies as they are born! Let's GPL that weed over there growing at the edge of the field!
Uhh, as a human I would hope you can't procreate puppies, and since "owning" humans is illegal in most places, there isn't much need for applying a license of freedom to living things.
>Don't you see how you're diluting the meaning of the GPL by bringing it up in each and every context where you think there's a slight chance it would be relevant?
Yeah. It is too bad the original poster said GPL rather than "free speech license". Ho hum.
Oh, now that is a name I wish they would use more often -- Tee two thousand sexy.:-)
Who wouldn't want to say that about their laptop?
>It took a day to compile the kernel, swapping continuously:)
And the HDD didn't melt? Decent equipment. A freind of mine once opened up the HDD in a Toshiba T1200 unit. Strange interface. And they used the circuit board as the bottom of the HDD. There was only half a metal can for the top half. Weird.
-- 386/DX40
-- 270 MB HDD using e2compr to compress ext2 on the fly
-- 8 MB RAM
-- TWO modems
-- Multilink connection
-- Hercules Graphics Card / Commodore Radar Green Phosphor monitor
-- Amazingly, sshd, httpd, and ftpd.
All that, and a network card + ipmasq/firewall... woah. And it all works no problem. With multilink on I get a full speed transfer (which, with my horrible 28.8kBps phone lines) of about 5-6kBps.
But, it gets worse, I decided to resurrect this POS last year:
-- 386 SX/16
-- 4 Mb SIPP RAM
-- 2x40 MB MFM HDD
-- Arcnet Card [I have a near unlimited supply... woooooo:-| ]
-- Using NFS
-- 1.2 MB Floppy for booting
-- Same crappy Hercules/Commodore monitor combo.
And yes, it (woah!) booted Linux, and, I beleive X via the NFS mount (after about 1/2 hour of swapping to the XT HDD)... That was fun. Yes, there is an X server for Hercules cards. Yay.
Fortunately, nothing possibly gets worse than a 386 SX/16 for Linux.
>Will it ever cure AIDS or solve our hunger problems through out the world?
Yes, because the many pharmaceutical companies would be FORCED to work ALONGSIDE and not AGAINST each other in their research. 500 scientists are probably more likely to find a better cure faster than 100...
>Will it make you warm at night?
The basic ideas of electricity (which powers many heaters -- you wouldn't believe how simple those devices are) are libre, just like the GPL. So again, yes.
>Will it ever hand you a glass of water in the desert?
Would I care? I don't know anybody who goes to the desert for jollies.
You can _taste_ C02 (or at least I seem to be able to). That's what makes "bad air" so horrible, and club soda so nasty...:-) But I may be wrong, worse things have happened.
There's 12 instances of Compaq, with only 5 instances of Linux. If you ask me this article has nothing to do about computer and has everything to do with paying Compaq, Nstar, and the Bank of New York lip service.
And what does he think is the primary feature of Linux -- free as in price or free as in code (they say one is the biggest asset and the other is world famous... so what is it -- finance or ice cream?)
Agreed. And to get there any one of today's OS needs a lot more work. Work which Linux experts will be well paid for.
>99.99% of the rest of the world doesn't care about the os. they care about the software they run.
Agreed, halfway. I think that the 99.99% is a bit high. Probably more like 90%. And anyone that doesn't care about the OS doesn't care about the software either. These people don't matter (as far as advancing tech is concerned), and never have. What car is "driving" the market right now? SUVs. Not mini-vans/station wagons/sedans. Why? Because someone who buys an SUV cares about what their car is capable of, and how long it will last. Not that they are always right, but this is what they would probably tell you...
>do i care about the inner workings of a door knob? no. i just want it to get me through the door.
You will the first time it breaks while you are trying to exit the bathroom (hasn't this happened to everybody yet?)
>meanwhile, you guys spend your time making your knobs turn smoother, forging your own metal plates, etc. yep. have fun tweaking while the world passes you by.
No problem. While we're at it we'll also put '00s security locks on our doors while your house is stuck in the unlocked 1910's "no one will B&E my house becuase people are too nice for that" paradigm.
I sleep secure at night knowing my front door uses the latest security technology (new doorknob and deadbolt). Do you with your 1910's tech?
The world is passing you by while you sit there and decide to learn nothing about it.
BTW: Why do you even post to slashdot "news for nerds" if you don't care about how technology works? Seems like a gas jockey writing to the WSJ saying how no one worries about stocks and bonds to me.
Hey, just being freindly here, might I suggest you buy a new keyboard? Your shift key is broken (Not sure how you made the question marks though).
I was going to write a big speech decrying what you have said, but I'll keep it short, and a bit offtopic.
Libraries.
Do you hate those things? They dictate terms as to the distrubution of media that the artist cannot control. They allow people to enjoy media for NO immediate cost. And any costs for the media become so watered down that the author likely only makes $0.01 per "impression" for their work. The worst part about libraries must be that they often require (and almost dictate to you, the seller) certain terms for works if they are to buy them. And, another thing libraries often do is have much more selection than your local bookstore and record stores combined!
Infact, I wonder if you have a burning hated for the library of congress? I beleive (but may be wrong) that, without question, all copyrighted American works MUST have at least one copy in the library of congress. I may be wrong, but that doesn't sound like you have any choice in the matter.
I think I'll make a trip to my local library and enjoy a CD for free. Maybe it will be yours.
You are so right. We wouldn't want any students to accidentally learn something (like setting up FTP properly). That would be bad. Very bad. Next thing you know they might learn how to set up nntp, or maybe even learn some perl so they can make their webserver cooler. Hell, at the end of it all, they might even fall into a sysadmin job.
And all of this, on their own time, without paying the college a dime. That's the real tragedy: The college doesn't get paid.
I've got a couple ideas on how to make browsing easier (but I'm not a good programmer, so I can't do it -- feel free to use these ideas in any way you like, as long as I don't have to pay for your software:-)
Put quick index tabs on the side of the help. Each quick index tab should correspond to either a new chapter (if bringing a book into electronic format) or a new idea (if the book is being written electronically). At the start of the chapter, in LARGE PRINT a one or two paragraph blurb generalising the entire chapter should appear, with each important thought highlighted as a hyperlink to the "real" section of the chapter it belongs to. The very first sentence should summarize the generalizations, that way you can read that sentence and understand what you might find. It should also be in bold to stand out.
Add the ability to do quick (one touch to set, one touch to check!), temporary bookmarks. I cannot find any electronic implementation of using your fingers as a quick "information" stop. This way, you can zoom in on the idea you want piecemeal.
As far as making it easy to read, try a larger point size, and make the program adaptable to large monitors. I HATE websites, ebooks, etc... that only use 1/3 of my 20" monitor! I didn't buy that extra 66% to waste it! The larger point size is necessary because the monitor doesn't provide the detail of a book. As far as your eyes straining, check to make sure your monitor does 80Hz+ at your preferred "reading" resolution... Even 75Hz feels bad after a while (to me).
Number 3 is solvable if Dual Head cards become popular... One monitor for the game, the other monitor for the manual.
I think the major detrement to reading documents on a computer is that you are stuck at the terminal. Unlike a book that you can read in bed lying down, read in the passenger seat of the car, read on the bus, read at college during a boring class, read on the toilet etc... a computer doesn't work like that. Laptops have much too low a resolution screen, too small a screen, etc... unless you pay big $$$. Also, while books are "inconspicuous", a decent laptop draws way too much attention in most public situations for comfortable reading.
No... cheap printer ports, serial ports, network cards, and other items sold at computer sales/garage sales are usually in ISA form. Really, an ISA printer port, 10 BT network card, or serial port isn't going to be any slower than a PCI version. Also, ISA soundcards are dirt cheap (again, at sales), and run just fine.
Also, you can usually get a CGA/TTL monitor for free including card from lots of people. All those cards are ISA. For a cheap server, these are a fine choice, since running X on a server is a waste (not that X won't work on a hercules graphics adapter...;-).
And then there's all that legacy hardware -- Bus mouse controllers, proprietary UPS controllers, proprietary scanner I/F boards, radio boards, arcnet cards, network cards with specially burned EEPROMS, etc, etc...
"Why buy more hardware just because it has a new bus if it offers no other immediate benefit to you?" is the way I look at it. Some people prefer the "But it has more crap that I don't need on it so I want it" approach...:-)
>What happens if Joe random user uses Linux, loses data because of a kernel bug, and then sues Linus saying that he had used the software but never agreed to the GPL as is his right
I figure that term 5 of the GPL could be removed in the next revision without making ANYONE angry. And, if this law is rectroactive, then it would hurt a lot more people than just Linus. HELP HELP! MS-DOS drivespace busted all my files. I'm suing!;-)
Whether it is or not, you are going to be bound by the least common denominator... copyright law. Copyright law won't allow direct cut-n-paste from one set of code to another, right?
So this will be either a test of GPL, or a test of copyright law. Either way, FSF would likely win...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I'll assume this is RIAA propaganda pasted to slashdot, but WTH, I'll take first crack at debunking (sorry about the length):
;-).
>A typical music fan who buys a CD might use that CD at home, take that CD in the car, make a tape of that CD,
I thought the RIAA hated being able to "duplicate" music via taping. Doesn't seem right. And the idea of being able to use it in more than one place without licensing? Doesn't jive either.
>That's probably why most consumers, when asked, describe CDs as a good value.
Show me the proof.
>At the same time, when asked directly whether CDs cost too much, some consumers will say yes! Why the contradiction?
...Because your lame-ass biased study simply couldn't fudge the results enough to say otherwise legally? Again, not enough proof.
>While the RIAA does not collect information on the specific costs that make up the price of a CD
Must be hard to comment on the following then, huh?
>there are many factors that go into the overall cost of a CD -- and the plastic it's pressed on, is among the least significant.
But you just said you knew nothing! You say one thing then the other. Even the government has a hard time contradicting itself in the same paragraph.
>Of course, the most important component of a CD is the artist's effort in developing that music.
Very wholeheartedly agreed.
>Artists receive royalties on each recording, which vary according to their contract, and the songwriter gets royalties too.
I don't know about you, but don't most bands write their own songs nowadays? It isn't like you go to the dime shop, buy some lyrics, and put music to them, right? So that's half that price gone.
>In addition, the label incurs additional costs in finding and signing new artists.
...And if they didn't do that they wouldn't be a label. They would be bankrupt. Face it: Labels MAKE their money with signed artists, so why complain?
>Once an artist or group has songs composed, they must then go into the studio and begin recording. The costs of recording this work, including recording studio fees, studio musicians, sound engineers, producers and others, all must be recovered by the cost of the CD.
Sure, I have no problem with that. Lets say this is real expensive, $100,000. Now a lot of albums that cost that amount sell 1,000,000 copies (albums that sell less aren't likely to have authors that can or labels willing to foot a big bill). That's $0.10 per copy.
>Then come marketing and promotion costs -- perhaps the most expensive part of the music business today.
You mean being played at NO cost on the radio isn't enough? You mean you have to advertise like everyone else? Holy s**t! Can you imagine the horror? That must be why my RadioShack phone cost $20... without that advertising it would be like $1 right? (no... advertising really shouldn't be the LARGEST concern in price [I would hope])
>For every album released in a given year, a marketing strategy was developed to make that album stand out among the other releases that hit the market that year. Art must be designed for the CD box, and promotional materials (posters, store displays and music videos) developed and produced.
Uhh, like again, no s**t. Without a "gimmick" you can't advertise. That's the way it works. Don't whine about it.
>For many artists, a costly concert tour is essential to promote their recordings.
From what I hear this is where most artists MAKE their money. Costly? Only for the people buying the tickets. If you aren't making enough to cover the cost of the concert, charge more. That's how everyone else works.
>Another factor commonly overlooked in assessing CD prices is to assume that all CDs are equally profitable. In fact, the vast majority is never profitable.
Again, agreed. That's how other things work, and have worked for years (books, magazines, movies come to mind). Deal with it. Books have by providing a "cheap" way to get a book (paperback). Time to provide a cheap alternative to CDs: The internet (where box art doesn't cost so much
>Between 1983 and 1996, the average price of a CD fell by more than 40%.
I'm willing to bet the price of TVs has fallen a lot since 1940 too. Too bad no one had a TV in 1940 [and therefore they were a speciality item, costing $$$], and no one I knew had a CD player until *I* got one in 1988 (or so). Since 1988 the price at my local shops has increased by about 50%.
>If CD prices had risen at the same rate as consumer prices over this period, the average retail price of a CD in 1996 would have been $33.86 instead of $12.75.
Are you telling me that the $0.75 cokes in the vending machine cost $0.25 in 1983? According to my records the price index is NOT just under 3x 1983 prices.
And if you can find me a more then 20 CDs at a local shoppe for $12.75 in 1996 (hell, or even now) then I'll show you a liar.
>While the price of CDs has fallen, the amount of music provided on a typical CD has increased substantially...
Yes, now they offer 80 Min. CDs because of higher laser tolerances. This extra 6 minutes over a 74 Min. CD is "substantial". What would the amount of music you can put on a DVD equal? Would you even have a word for it?
>...along with higher quality in terms of fidelity...
You mean my CDs now have 24 bits resolution than 16, or they now sample at 52 kHz rather than 44.1 kHz? Change in fidelity == change in standard != the same old CD format. An out and out lie.
>...durability,...
Yes, now CDs are manufactured properly and don't get laser rot. Otherwise I wonder where the difference is (they have always been made from polycarbonate, right?). Thank you for making them properly. If you are charging me more for a working product, then you are screwing me over.
>...ease of use...
A total complete out and out amazingly STUPID lie. How has ease of use improved? The CD format has remained unchanged. To make it "easier" you would have to change the format, making it not work with CD players. ie: You don't have a CD.
(And if you think that you can get away with saying players are easier to use because of the RIAA, well, show me an RIAA brand CD player).
>...and range of choices, including multi-media material, such as music videos, interviews and discographies.
Wait up a minute here. When CDs were first produced there was less room for "cover" art and no "sleeve" art. Now you have a cheap way to fit these back in (as digital data on the CD) and you think that means you can charge MORE?
>Content of this type often requires considerable production expense and adds a whole new dimension that goes beyond conventional audio.
Yep. That's what I said. Use the extra room on the CD like you would the sleeve for the records you always used to make so "cheaply".
>In contrast, CD prices are low compared to other forms of entertainment and one of the few entertainment units to decrease in price...
Decrease in price? Over what period? Since their inception or in the last decade?
>...even though production, marketing and distribution costs have increased.
Life's a bitch, huh? Looks like you have everything against you. Consumers to buy your product. People who make it for you. Radio stations to play it for you. And then they go and slap this "inflation" tax deal on ya. What a bummer. I feel for ya.
Quoted from USA Today (are they still in business? I don't live in the US): "consumers don't seem to balk at the rising price of fun in this strong, family-friendly economy."
Sounds like something one might say during the Regan or Bush administration. What is the date of this mystery article anyways? And what person wrote it?
>The prices of other forms of entertainment have risen, on average, more rapidly than has music or consumer prices, with most admission prices for other forms of entertainment having increased more than 90% between 1983 and 1996.
You mean movie theaters? Yeah, they are a rip off. But they are STILL cheaper than a CD. And movies cost a hell of a lot more to make than a CD, and are a hell of a lot more likely to fail (In my B movie experience).
>By all measures, when you consider how long people have the music and how often they can go back and get "re-entertained" CDs truly are an incredible value for the money.
Can't agree. Proof? You have none, did I hear? Too bad.
>when did ALTs first come out, in HTML 2.0?
/comments.pl in order to allow everyone to have a fair chance to post.
:-)
IIRC they have always been there, even in HTML 1.0. Just people are too lazy to use them.
[offtopic]
Suggestion time (and wasting 1 minute more time):
I just got this as an error message:
:Slashdot requires you to wait 1 minute between each submission of
:It's been 1 minute since your last submission!
Uhhhhhhhhhhh... Oookay... How long was that again?
I don't know what the US definition of public is, but in Canada and England (and, I would guess any English speaking country) it often means Governmental.
.gov and (possibly) .mil websites would all have to have alt tags... Other websites can say whatever they want, however they want (I believe your 1st amendment protects that right, or is it the 4th?).
:-)
ie: Government facilities are required to accomodate the disabled.
So, in that case,
And no, image maps and shockwave do NOT necessarialy have to go. I believe the ADA would say that the site has to be fully functional for a disabled user; This doesn't mean removing non-disabled extras that don't affect the funcitonality of the site. Otherwise the local town hall wouldn't have any steps. Instead they just add a ramp. Fully functional for the disabled user, and just as functional for the non-disabled.
>And no friggin frames.
That goes whether you are a public institution or not.
>The best way to do that is to lower their social status until they can't get laid.
Who gets laid more often? A professional athelete, A construction worker, or a bookworm?
>How do you ever expect us to improve the human race if we don't breed out the most damaging weaknesses?
Ahh, but the human race's most damaging weakness is to be totally helpless. Assuming you have no major diseases, if you don't do any labour, or aren't athletic, or simply don't work out, you are likely a good candidate for a heart attack. Soon.
>Linux: The OTHER OS that's bloated as Windows.
I had to bite:
I guess this 1.44 MB distro doesn't count:
http://www.linuxrouter.org/
>Most small ISPs won't go for it.. they can't afford the loss of busness they'd get.
:-)
Heck, if the big ISPs made the deal with Sony (as you say, not likely) the small ISPs would benefit wildly. Anyone on one of the big firewalled ISPs will go elsewhere.
All the small ISP has to do is advertise "We don't firewall Napster" and BAM! instant business...
>If one is doing the high bandwidth video editing, I would assume that it would have to be SCSI to be acceptable in latency and bandwidth.
I dunno. I have a Matrox Rainbow Runner G. I have no problem capturing at about 740x480@30fps... on my 13 GB IDE Quantum drive.
I see. It's like tithing... where you give 10% of your money to church.
Well, I suggest that since many cable modems only upload at 128kbps (due to caps) and can download at up to 3Mbps, that is a total "tithe" of 4.3%
Ok. So I will do that on my modem connection. Let's say I'm lucky and get a 40kBps connection (which I never do). That means I should limit outgoing transfers to 1.72kbps. Ooooooooooh 172 bytes PER SECOND. Just under 6 hours a song! I'll be the nicest person on the block! Hey, at least I am giving, since if I don't do this I obviously have a heart of stone and never will ever give. And it is important that it comes from the heart. All 4.3% of it.
>You will always see people who slack.... but they are not the majority.
I've found people tend to slack MORE in an environment where the boss stifles their every move (no personal use of ANYTHING, etc...). People tend to just find the areas the boss never visits and spend as much time as they can there, doing what the hell they wanted to in the first place (but no work, since you can't do that much of it away from the desk in many jobs).
This, of course, separates the Normals from the Ass Kissers. The Ass Kissers are ALWAYS in the office, the Normals never stick about in that environment.
The rule? People have their own opinions, ideas, and reasons about the use of an office. The bosses job? To keep those in check with company policy without making people feel trapped. This is assuming reasonable company policy. Ahahah... yah, right.
>Best I can think of is running 4" PVC pipe from the utility room to the attic and then dropping cabling into the closet
:-) PVC will burn very quickly with friction. This will, of course, be introduced in a large way when you pull the pullstring attached to the wires. I've already seen SMOKING cable come out of long runs of pipe (where people forgot to put on cable lubricant, whoops). You might get away with it in a house though. But, to be safe, some ultra cheap, metal but non aluminum pipe would be best.
Good idea, wrong pipe.
Pipe is nice because the curves on it are nicely rounded, making cable runs a cinch. Venting would suck since the cable would constantly get snagged on the corners during pulling.
>They are probably paying more than us modem users.
You know, I thought about that once, and realized it is CHEAPER for a heavy internet user to get high speed internet. Look at your costs (remember, heavy internet user): [BTW: This is in Canada, so $CAN]
-- $23/mo. second phone line.
-- $20 - $25/mo. service (decent service will cost).
My local DSL provider (well, local to the city, but won't give any DSL to me, crappy exchange, out in the country, lucky I didn't get stuck with a party line [still legal in Ontario, Canada]) charges $30 a month (goes up to $40 after 3 months).
Any way you look at it, DSL is cheaper than a phone line (here, in Canada). Since high-speed lines have ALWAYS been cheaper in the US, I assume your DSL is too (might be wrong though...).
>We're growing tired of you kids misapplying the GPL to tasks it was never intended to fulfill.
Hey, I didn't make the initial suggestion. I was just trying to point out the facts of free information. Many licenses, similar to the GPL, that better apply to the printed word can offer the same information as free speech. I am trying to discuss the spirit of freedom of speech, not necessarialy the GPL (although my post used it as an example).
I really don't care what you name your license, but if it gives people freedom, there is no limit as to what can be done with the information.
The fact is we wouldn't be as far as we are today without the freedom of basic information. Imagine not being able to know (legally) basic electricity or basic chemistry and you'll see what I am talking about.
>Let's GPL puppies as they are born! Let's GPL that weed over there growing at the edge of the field!
Uhh, as a human I would hope you can't procreate puppies, and since "owning" humans is illegal in most places, there isn't much need for applying a license of freedom to living things.
>Don't you see how you're diluting the meaning of the GPL by bringing it up in each and every context where you think there's a slight chance it would be relevant?
Yeah. It is too bad the original poster said GPL rather than "free speech license". Ho hum.
>Toshiba T2000SXe
:-)
:)
Oh, now that is a name I wish they would use more often -- Tee two thousand sexy.
Who wouldn't want to say that about their laptop?
>It took a day to compile the kernel, swapping continuously
And the HDD didn't melt? Decent equipment. A freind of mine once opened up the HDD in a Toshiba T1200 unit. Strange interface. And they used the circuit board as the bottom of the HDD. There was only half a metal can for the top half. Weird.
Ok, no one is perfect. But I still stand beside the rest of my reasoning. :-)
I'll one up you (I can't help myself!) ;-):
:-| ]
-- 386/DX40
-- 270 MB HDD using e2compr to compress ext2 on the fly
-- 8 MB RAM
-- TWO modems
-- Multilink connection
-- Hercules Graphics Card / Commodore Radar Green Phosphor monitor
-- Amazingly, sshd, httpd, and ftpd.
All that, and a network card + ipmasq/firewall... woah. And it all works no problem. With multilink on I get a full speed transfer (which, with my horrible 28.8kBps phone lines) of about 5-6kBps.
But, it gets worse, I decided to resurrect this POS last year:
-- 386 SX/16
-- 4 Mb SIPP RAM
-- 2x40 MB MFM HDD
-- Arcnet Card [I have a near unlimited supply... woooooo
-- Using NFS
-- 1.2 MB Floppy for booting
-- Same crappy Hercules/Commodore monitor combo.
And yes, it (woah!) booted Linux, and, I beleive X via the NFS mount (after about 1/2 hour of swapping to the XT HDD)... That was fun. Yes, there is an X server for Hercules cards. Yay.
Fortunately, nothing possibly gets worse than a 386 SX/16 for Linux.
>Will it ever cure AIDS or solve our hunger problems through out the world?
Yes, because the many pharmaceutical companies would be FORCED to work ALONGSIDE and not AGAINST each other in their research. 500 scientists are probably more likely to find a better cure faster than 100...
>Will it make you warm at night?
The basic ideas of electricity (which powers many heaters -- you wouldn't believe how simple those devices are) are libre, just like the GPL. So again, yes.
>Will it ever hand you a glass of water in the desert?
Would I care? I don't know anybody who goes to the desert for jollies.
You can _taste_ C02 (or at least I seem to be able to). That's what makes "bad air" so horrible, and club soda so nasty... :-)
But I may be wrong, worse things have happened.
There's 12 instances of Compaq, with only 5 instances of Linux. If you ask me this article has nothing to do about computer and has everything to do with paying Compaq, Nstar, and the Bank of New York lip service.
And what does he think is the primary feature of Linux -- free as in price or free as in code (they say one is the biggest asset and the other is world famous... so what is it -- finance or ice cream?)
Weird, poorly written, self contradicting article indeed.
>the future of os's is transparency
Agreed. And to get there any one of today's OS needs a lot more work. Work which Linux experts will be well paid for.
>99.99% of the rest of the world doesn't care about the os. they care about the software they run.
Agreed, halfway. I think that the 99.99% is a bit high. Probably more like 90%. And anyone that doesn't care about the OS doesn't care about the software either. These people don't matter (as far as advancing tech is concerned), and never have. What car is "driving" the market right now? SUVs. Not mini-vans/station wagons/sedans. Why? Because someone who buys an SUV cares about what their car is capable of, and how long it will last. Not that they are always right, but this is what they would probably tell you...
>do i care about the inner workings of a door knob? no. i just want it to get me through the door.
You will the first time it breaks while you are trying to exit the bathroom (hasn't this happened to everybody yet?)
>meanwhile, you guys spend your time making your knobs turn smoother, forging your own metal plates, etc. yep. have fun tweaking while the world passes you by.
No problem. While we're at it we'll also put '00s security locks on our doors while your house is stuck in the unlocked 1910's "no one will B&E my house becuase people are too nice for that" paradigm.
I sleep secure at night knowing my front door uses the latest security technology (new doorknob and deadbolt). Do you with your 1910's tech?
The world is passing you by while you sit there and decide to learn nothing about it.
BTW: Why do you even post to slashdot "news for nerds" if you don't care about how technology works? Seems like a gas jockey writing to the WSJ saying how no one worries about stocks and bonds to me.
Hey, just being freindly here, might I suggest you buy a new keyboard? Your shift key is broken (Not sure how you made the question marks though).
I was going to write a big speech decrying what you have said, but I'll keep it short, and a bit offtopic.
Libraries.
Do you hate those things? They dictate terms as to the distrubution of media that the artist cannot control. They allow people to enjoy media for NO immediate cost. And any costs for the media become so watered down that the author likely only makes $0.01 per "impression" for their work. The worst part about libraries must be that they often require (and almost dictate to you, the seller) certain terms for works if they are to buy them. And, another thing libraries often do is have much more selection than your local bookstore and record stores combined!
Infact, I wonder if you have a burning hated for the library of congress? I beleive (but may be wrong) that, without question, all copyrighted American works MUST have at least one copy in the library of congress. I may be wrong, but that doesn't sound like you have any choice in the matter.
I think I'll make a trip to my local library and enjoy a CD for free. Maybe it will be yours.
So, tell me, do you hate libraries?
You are so right. We wouldn't want any students to accidentally learn something (like setting up FTP properly). That would be bad. Very bad. Next thing you know they might learn how to set up nntp, or maybe even learn some perl so they can make their webserver cooler. Hell, at the end of it all, they might even fall into a sysadmin job.
And all of this, on their own time, without paying the college a dime. That's the real tragedy: The college doesn't get paid.
I've got a couple ideas on how to make browsing easier (but I'm not a good programmer, so I can't do it -- feel free to use these ideas in any way you like, as long as I don't have to pay for your software :-)
Put quick index tabs on the side of the help. Each quick index tab should correspond to either a new chapter (if bringing a book into electronic format) or a new idea (if the book is being written electronically). At the start of the chapter, in LARGE PRINT a one or two paragraph blurb generalising the entire chapter should appear, with each important thought highlighted as a hyperlink to the "real" section of the chapter it belongs to. The very first sentence should summarize the generalizations, that way you can read that sentence and understand what you might find. It should also be in bold to stand out.
Add the ability to do quick (one touch to set, one touch to check!), temporary bookmarks. I cannot find any electronic implementation of using your fingers as a quick "information" stop. This way, you can zoom in on the idea you want piecemeal.
As far as making it easy to read, try a larger point size, and make the program adaptable to large monitors. I HATE websites, ebooks, etc... that only use 1/3 of my 20" monitor! I didn't buy that extra 66% to waste it! The larger point size is necessary because the monitor doesn't provide the detail of a book. As far as your eyes straining, check to make sure your monitor does 80Hz+ at your preferred "reading" resolution... Even 75Hz feels bad after a while (to me).
Number 3 is solvable if Dual Head cards become popular... One monitor for the game, the other monitor for the manual.
I think the major detrement to reading documents on a computer is that you are stuck at the terminal. Unlike a book that you can read in bed lying down, read in the passenger seat of the car, read on the bus, read at college during a boring class, read on the toilet etc... a computer doesn't work like that. Laptops have much too low a resolution screen, too small a screen, etc... unless you pay big $$$. Also, while books are "inconspicuous", a decent laptop draws way too much attention in most public situations for comfortable reading.
Just my two cents on the issue...
>Is that the only real reason?????
;-).
:-)
No... cheap printer ports, serial ports, network cards, and other items sold at computer sales/garage sales are usually in ISA form. Really, an ISA printer port, 10 BT network card, or serial port isn't going to be any slower than a PCI version. Also, ISA soundcards are dirt cheap (again, at sales), and run just fine.
Also, you can usually get a CGA/TTL monitor for free including card from lots of people. All those cards are ISA. For a cheap server, these are a fine choice, since running X on a server is a waste (not that X won't work on a hercules graphics adapter...
And then there's all that legacy hardware -- Bus mouse controllers, proprietary UPS controllers, proprietary scanner I/F boards, radio boards, arcnet cards, network cards with specially burned EEPROMS, etc, etc...
"Why buy more hardware just because it has a new bus if it offers no other immediate benefit to you?" is the way I look at it. Some people prefer the "But it has more crap that I don't need on it so I want it" approach...
>What happens if Joe random user uses Linux, loses data because of a kernel bug, and then sues Linus saying that he had used the software but never agreed to the GPL as is his right
;-)
I figure that term 5 of the GPL could be removed in the next revision without making ANYONE angry. And, if this law is rectroactive, then it would hurt a lot more people than just Linus. HELP HELP! MS-DOS drivespace busted all my files. I'm suing!
Just my 2 cents.
>Then is it valid?
;-)
Whether it is or not, you are going to be bound by the least common denominator... copyright law. Copyright law won't allow direct cut-n-paste from one set of code to another, right?
So this will be either a test of GPL, or a test of copyright law. Either way, FSF would likely win...