A managers job is to tell people what to do not how to do it, otherwise there is no point hireing someone if you are just going to tell them how to do their job.
I think this sort of thing could have some serious potential.
The thing about these sorts of scheme is that they believe that fundamentally most people are honest, as was demonstrated by King. The record industry (and movie) work on the principal that if people can steal it they will.
I believe that the latter arguement has got human nature fundamentally wrong. I don't mind paying for a CD/Video but what I do mind is the fact that these things cost so much and most of the money goes to the middle men. This is especially true with CDs when the artists get relatively little.
This sort of thing works because most people don't mind paying Steven King 1USD a chapter (as long as there arn't too many chapters:-> ) when they know that he is the one getting the money, rather than some middle man.
The same could work for music. When we are all downloading music direct from the artists we cercumvent the distibution companies, removing them froom the loop. Most people would be willing to pay a reasonable amount direct to the band on an honour basis, and with costs so low you wouldn't have to ask for much.
I live in York (england) and at the Minster (big church) they don't charge you to look around (partly because they can't), but they do request that everyone make a voluntary donation of a suggested amount, and most people do. Admitidly it being religious probably helps, but I have seen a similar scheme used for other historic buildings. This works because people are generally willing to pay for what they get.
The same is true for musicians, artists, writers, movie makers and software writers. If people like what you have done they will more than likely pay for it because they want more.
What people object to is paying through the nose for a CD only to find out that it is rubbish when they get home.
With the advent of digital distribution for music, books and films (digi projectors and broardband?) we could (eventually) see the sidelining of the distributers, and money going direct to artists on an honour system. At which point piracy becomes moot and everyone is happy (except the RIAA and MPAA of course).
A little utopian (and rather long winded), but we can hope. King has already shown that it can work for the well known artists, it just remains to be seen how it scales down to the up and comming ones who have no publicity machine or well known name. Mabey.
The thing about ISS as a stepping stone was metaphorical. Personally I think the ISS was not thought out properly from its inception (partly because it was a political decision as much as a scientific one) and has fundamental flaws.
What I was trying to say (and failing rather badly) was that that they should be concentrating their efforts less on rather etherial aims such as the search for evidence of past life on mars and more on building practical technologies and an infrastructure for the future exploration of space.
I believe that NASA would be better off ditching all its long distance landers (orbiters don't seem as much of a problem), especially the Life on Mars ones for a decade or two. In that time it could plow some serious investment,together with the private sector, (space needs more mass production and commoditization to drive down prices) into better propulsion technologies and single stage, fast turn around mass use, cheap, reliable lifters (all relative of course) to make future space travel easier.
For the past fourty years NASA, and the other space agencies have been throwing money away in one shot missions (mostly). By putting money into building for the future they will be making a real investment that will save money and make space travel easier and faster in the long run.
The search for life on mars can wait, lets start using space for more real world applications and get the costs down.
My tupence
NASA seem to have been going backwards since the 70s, really
Too right. The problem with NASA now is that it has to fight for good public opinion to guarentee funding. In the old days the government could just throw money at it and everyone went "Wow Space travel" and didn't ask questions. Now they have to look like they are doing something with their money, which means more missions, more often.
Its like the old adage about if you have nothing to do, make sure you have something in your hand (like a clipboard), else someone will start asking questions.
It is no longer what NASA does that counts, it's what it appears to do. Which is unfortunate because they are doing some brilliant work but none of it is as high profile as their failures.
Mabey they should shift their PR more over to these things and away from the more risky end of the business, I think sometimes that they underestimate the public's interest in science.
I can't help feeling that NASA has got its priorities all mixed up.
It keeps going for all these high cost, high risk mission to far flung places on the pretext of searching for evidence of life.
As cool as this may be I think they would be better of plowing more money into a replacement for the shuttle, possibly a return to the moon, and the ISS. I know that alot of people consider the ISS a wast of money but with a bit of work it could really achieve something. All three of the above might act as stepping stones to future exploration of the solar system, providing cheaper lifting and bases from which cheaper missions can be launched.
NASA is obsessed with shooting big, dumb rockets at long distance targets at hugh cost. If only it could learn some pacience. If there is evidence of life on Mars it will still be around in fifty years time.
I think that the search for life is a laudable aim, but there are more useful things NASA could be doing with all that money, like building a platform (metaphorically speaking) from which future generations might more easily explore the solar system, rather than wasting all that time and money on short term projects for now.
NASA, and all the other space agencies, should be building the highway to the stars, not just driving to them in an offroader, year after year.
My tupence (sorry about the bad metaphor at the end)
Thats also why something like 70% of DVD players in the UK are chipped in some way. Personally I can't see Region Encoding lasting much longer. Tesco actually went so far as to deliberatly stock DVD players that were easy to set up for reqionless play. The market always finds way. I supect that that ADSl prices will come down and we will see no frills pipe providers filling the market for straight net connections. I believe CallNet0800 have always allowed servers on their system, I expect to see an ADSL equivalent in the not to distant future, especially after July 2001 when the local loop is unbundled.
Slashdot Mirror
A managers job is to tell people what to do not how to do it, otherwise there is no point hireing someone if you are just going to tell them how to do their job.
I think this sort of thing could have some serious potential.
:-> ) when they know that he is the one getting the money, rather than some middle man.
The thing about these sorts of scheme is that they believe that fundamentally most people are honest, as was demonstrated by King. The record industry (and movie) work on the principal that if people can steal it they will.
I believe that the latter arguement has got human nature fundamentally wrong. I don't mind paying for a CD/Video but what I do mind is the fact that these things cost so much and most of the money goes to the middle men. This is especially true with CDs when the artists get relatively little.
This sort of thing works because most people don't mind paying Steven King 1USD a chapter (as long as there arn't too many chapters
The same could work for music. When we are all downloading music direct from the artists we cercumvent the distibution companies, removing them froom the loop. Most people would be willing to pay a reasonable amount direct to the band on an honour basis, and with costs so low you wouldn't have to ask for much.
I live in York (england) and at the Minster (big church) they don't charge you to look around (partly because they can't), but they do request that everyone make a voluntary donation of a suggested amount, and most people do. Admitidly it being religious probably helps, but I have seen a similar scheme used for other historic buildings. This works because people are generally willing to pay for what they get.
The same is true for musicians, artists, writers, movie makers and software writers. If people like what you have done they will more than likely pay for it because they want more.
What people object to is paying through the nose for a CD only to find out that it is rubbish when they get home.
With the advent of digital distribution for music, books and films (digi projectors and broardband?) we could (eventually) see the sidelining of the distributers, and money going direct to artists on an honour system. At which point piracy becomes moot and everyone is happy (except the RIAA and MPAA of course).
A little utopian (and rather long winded), but we can hope. King has already shown that it can work for the well known artists, it just remains to be seen how it scales down to the up and comming ones who have no publicity machine or well known name. Mabey.
The thing about ISS as a stepping stone was metaphorical. Personally I think the ISS was not thought out properly from its inception (partly because it was a political decision as much as a scientific one) and has fundamental flaws.
,together with the private sector, (space needs more mass production and commoditization to drive down prices) into better propulsion technologies and single stage, fast turn around mass use, cheap, reliable lifters (all relative of course) to make future space travel easier.
What I was trying to say (and failing rather badly) was that that they should be concentrating their efforts less on rather etherial aims such as the search for evidence of past life on mars and more on building practical technologies and an infrastructure for the future exploration of space.
I believe that NASA would be better off ditching all its long distance landers (orbiters don't seem as much of a problem), especially the Life on Mars ones for a decade or two. In that time it could plow some serious investment
For the past fourty years NASA, and the other space agencies have been throwing money away in one shot missions (mostly). By putting money into building for the future they will be making a real investment that will save money and make space travel easier and faster in the long run.
The search for life on mars can wait, lets start using space for more real world applications and get the costs down. My tupence
NASA seem to have been going backwards since the 70s, really
Too right. The problem with NASA now is that it has to fight for good public opinion to guarentee funding. In the old days the government could just throw money at it and everyone went "Wow Space travel" and didn't ask questions. Now they have to look like they are doing something with their money, which means more missions, more often.
Its like the old adage about if you have nothing to do, make sure you have something in your hand (like a clipboard), else someone will start asking questions.
It is no longer what NASA does that counts, it's what it appears to do. Which is unfortunate because they are doing some brilliant work but none of it is as high profile as their failures.
Mabey they should shift their PR more over to these things and away from the more risky end of the business, I think sometimes that they underestimate the public's interest in science.
I can't help feeling that NASA has got its priorities all mixed up.
It keeps going for all these high cost, high risk mission to far flung places on the pretext of searching for evidence of life.
As cool as this may be I think they would be better of plowing more money into a replacement for the shuttle, possibly a return to the moon, and the ISS. I know that alot of people consider the ISS a wast of money but with a bit of work it could really achieve something. All three of the above might act as stepping stones to future exploration of the solar system, providing cheaper lifting and bases from which cheaper missions can be launched.
NASA is obsessed with shooting big, dumb rockets at long distance targets at hugh cost. If only it could learn some pacience. If there is evidence of life on Mars it will still be around in fifty years time.
I think that the search for life is a laudable aim, but there are more useful things NASA could be doing with all that money, like building a platform (metaphorically speaking) from which future generations might more easily explore the solar system, rather than wasting all that time and money on short term projects for now.
NASA, and all the other space agencies, should be building the highway to the stars, not just driving to them in an offroader, year after year.
My tupence (sorry about the bad metaphor at the end)
Thats also why something like 70% of DVD players in the UK are chipped in some way. Personally I can't see Region Encoding lasting much longer. Tesco actually went so far as to deliberatly stock DVD players that were easy to set up for reqionless play. The market always finds way. I supect that that ADSl prices will come down and we will see no frills pipe providers filling the market for straight net connections. I believe CallNet0800 have always allowed servers on their system, I expect to see an ADSL equivalent in the not to distant future, especially after July 2001 when the local loop is unbundled.