FAT itself is proprietary, true. However, it's readily accessible through non-proprietary software. MP3 is the same - it's technically proprietary, but it's also an industry standard that is readily accessible.
I can take my $15 1GB MP3 and my BlackBerry both and hook them up to my Windows box *and* my Linux box without loading any software from anyone - support for standard USB flash drives is built into both operating systems (and, I'd assume, Mac). To the operating system, they look like any other USB flash drive out there.
I can put anything I want on the drives, and if it's MP3 (also proprietary, but also readily accessible in most platforms) both units will recognize it and allow me to play it as music.
I didn't have to install anything anywhere to be able to do this. No drivers, no software, no nothing. Plug 'em in and start copying music. Done.
But my wife's iPod Touch needs iTunes (proprietary software) installed on the Windows box, and I'd have to install software on the Linux box to support it.
Don't get me wrong, I think the iPod Touch is an awesome gizmo. But it does have drawbacks.
PS: And I cannot name the specific company or even where it was, but I do remember one of the duck tours I took handing out plastic duck calls.
Since I've never been in California in my life, I can safely assume it was neither company named in the suit.
Since it was long enough ago that I cannot recall the company or the state, it was probably at least 20 years ago, meaning it probably predates the practice in California, if not both companies.
Since I can neither name the company nor the state, I guess my assertion is pretty much worthless, but to my knowledge handing out plastic duck calls is NOT unique to one company.
Ford trademarked a blue oval because they were the first company that used a blue oval in association with automobiles. DuPont, same deal, different color and industry.
DUKW boats, Duck Tours, pictures of ducks, and quacking noises are pretty clearly associated. I have yet to get on a duck boat and NOT get told by the tour operator that I'm to quack at everyone I see. It's part of the gag.
True, most boat operators don't hand out plastic duck calls, but the association of duck calls with the DUKW boats is clearly there (do some field research and take a tour sometime - they are fun, if more than a little silly).
Trademarking the specific sound that a duck call makes and differentiating it from the other ways of making duck-like sounds is rather a fine differentiation, when quacking sounds have been a part of the whole Duck Tour experience since, well, the first Duck Tour...
I came to the sudden realization after reading more of the comments that most/.ers are probably only hearing of Duck Tours for the first time. I guess they are more of a niche market than I thought.
Anyway, they are not at all uncommon, and they all follow the same basic business model.
1) Buy a few DUKWs, fix 'em up and spray-paint them in bright colors, 2) come up with a picture of a duck to represent your company, almost always a bright yellow duck 3) develop a route that allows you to do a tour on both land and flat water, 4) hire/license guides and teach them a few interesting tidbits about the route, and tell them to tell their riders to quack to everyone they see, 5) profit.
Actually, if one of the companies were to simply paint their boats black and white, they could have a LOON tour and they'd be absolutely unique in the industry (to my knowledge at least). Then they'd have a really good case to soundmark a loon cry as an associative sound with land/water tours, and they'd be clearly differentiated from their competitors.
Or just pick your bird. Anything but a duck, because EVERYONE uses a duck, and EVERYONE makes quacking noises. You aren't differentiating, even if you make your own distinctive plastic quacker thingie - you're copying what EVERYONE ELSE has already done, just putting a teeny variation on the theme. And that shouldn't be trademark-worthy.
There are a decent number of them around the country. Portland, Maine has one. I'm pretty sure there are a couple still in Florida (I took one in Bradenton once, but I think that company has since folded). There used to be one in Cincinnati, Ohio. A quick Google search has one in Arkansas and one in Philadelphia, and those are just on the first page.
I've been on about a half dozen (and I've never been to California, so neither of the operators in the suit ran any of them I've been on). Quacking is just part of the shtick.
If there's copy-catting going on here, then both operators are equally guilty. Duck sounds have been associated with every Duck Tour I've done, and the whole reason they are called Duck Tours is because they use a military surplus DUKW. It's a blatantly obvious pun, and quacking sounds are as clearly associated with duck tours as bells are to trolleys, whistles are to trains, and driving by ignoring your outstretched hand is to taxis.
There may be a larger body of people who have never heard of or taken a Duck Tour, but they are pretty much the same throughout the country, and I don't think either company can lay claim to having invented the concept of using a DUKW and calling it a "Duck Boat" to use for tours. Neither can either company lay claim to having established the association of quacking with ducks.
For the former, we can thank whomever came up with the DUKW designation used to identify the boats that most of the operators use, and it's a 1950s boat if I recall correctly, so it predates any of the companies that bought them as military surplus and painted them bright colors.
For the latter, I think we can thank actual ducks.
There are LOTS of companies in the US that offer so-called "Duck Tours". The name isn't a coincidence, it's a play on the name of the boat used (DUKW, a US Military surplus amphibious vehicle). And every single one of them that I've heard of uses the same name for the same reason, and continues the pun by encouraging their customers to make quacking noises. It's a generic name and business model, not a specific brand.
And, yes, they are really silly. But they're fun, and quite often an interesting tour of the waterfront from the road, then the same stretch from the river. I've been Duck Tours run by at least a half dozen different companies, and in all of them you can expect:
A: a brightly-colored DUKW or a newer boat that's been made to look like one, B: a tour that involves driving on land for a while, then driving straight into the water somewhere, tooling around on the water, then coming back out on land, and C: everyone on board will be making quacking noises at the request of the tour guide / driver.
Sure, but most "Duck Tour" companies have the same or a similar association. The name "Duck" comes from the boats they use (military surplus DUKW amphibious boats), so the association with ducks isn't unique to any one tour company. And I have yet to be on a "Duck" tour where the tour drivers didn't suggest that you make goofy duck sounds, and a couple even handed out cheap plastic duck calls. It's all part of the same pun that every single Duck Tour operator uses as their shtick.
Now, if someone used a DUKW to make a DUKE tour and had everyone dress up as John Wayne and yell lines from his movies, OK, that would be a differentiating factor. No one's done that one yet. "Head 'em up and move 'em out, pardner!"
Similarly, if they were to use some other noise, like kazoos or ukeleles, they'd get the same annoyance factor but it would be different from everyone else's, and therefore unique and trademarkable. But Duck Tour equals Duck Sounds is not only common, it's cliche.
They could probably trademark their sound if they asked everyone NOT to make duck sounds. Because they'd be the only ones in the business who did.
But I don't see how something that is common practice could be trademarkable. It's like trademarking using a bell for a trolley so no other company in the country could use a bell, or using a lighted sign on the roof of a vehicle to indicate the vehicle is a taxi, or a barber's pole to indicate a barber.
If I hear quacking noises and laughter coming from the middle of the street next to me or a river nearby, I'll be completely unsurprised if I look up and see a DUKW in bright colors with a bunch of people on board. I won't necessarily expect to see any specific company's DUKW.
Most "Duck Tour" operators are employing a common pun, since most use surplus military DUKW amphibious vehicles.
But it's a VERY common theme, so most of the company logos are some sort of stylized duck in or around the water, or splashing water, often wearing raingear.
Every duck tour I've been on (and it's been a decent handful) has also associated some form of quacking noise with the experience (some use cheap plastic duck calls they hand out, others just ask their customers to shout "QUACK QUACK!"). So a duck call may be incidentally associated with a Duck Tour, but they are incidentally associated with each and every Duck Tour I've been on, and that's at least a half dozen of them in nearly as many states.
Since it's a common association, I don't see how it could be considered a competitive differentiating factor for a specific company.
I've been on several duck tours, from several different companies in different states. Every one of them asked their customers to make some form of quacking noise (to the mixed amusement and annoyance of people around us - one taxi driver in Boston quite memorably shouted back "QUACK THIS!" and stuck up his middle finger, but I digress). Several (not the plaintiff or defendant in this case) even handed out cheap plastic duck noisemakers as part of the ticket price.
I'd have a hard time believing that trademarking the sound of a duck noisemaker quacking as a representation of a specific duck tour company would hold up in court. It's a common theme amongst all duck tour companies, and an obvious association. "I'm climbing on board a colorfully-painted DUKW, I see pictures of ducks, and I hear quacking noises from excited passengers, yup, I'm on a Duck Tour all right!"
Now if this company CUSTOM-DESIGNED a duck quacker thingie and handed out those, and they sounded markedly different from any commonly-available duck call, I could see trademarking THAT sound. I could even see soundmarking the use of, say, a kazoo on a duck tour. That would be a differentiating factor, because it's a noisemaker not usually associated with duck tours.
Previously-cited examples include a lion's roar to denote a film company, or three notes or a picture of a peacock to differentiate one TV station from another. But MGM can't prevent anyone from playing a lion's roar during a nature documentary on Africa, and NBC couldn't prevent someone from using a picture of a peacock (even a rival network) as part of a television show. Trademarks must be unique (complex company logo) or uniquely applied (the word WINDOWS to describe a computer operating system).
But this is a common sound, made by a commonly-available kids toy, that is also commonly associated with duck tours. I can't see how one duck tour operator could suddenly decide he has exclusive rights to use the sound in association with duck tours, when many of them have done so for years.
If the group used kazoos, OK, there we have a serious differentiating factor. Kazoo "music" is not normally associated with duck tours, so all they have to do is say "XYZ Duck Tours. It's a kaZOO out there!" in their ads, hand out crappy plastic kazoos shaped like duck beaks, and BAM! (trademark Emeril Legassi, but only for cooking!) - trademarkable image/sound association with their specific duck tour. It'd be quirky enough to differentiate them and be a unique image for their company. Easily unique enough to trademark.
It's still a common sound made from a common device, so CUSTOMERS of their rivals are free to use it while riding, but their rivals could not legitimately use kazoos or kazoo sounds as part of their promotion or advertising.
Well, another good reason for not introducing gravity into the ISS is because many/most of the experiments done there are microgravity experiments. Why spend all the money to get up there and then make the environment just like Earth? Rather defeats the point.
It's like city folk moving up here to Maine then expecting town water, town sewer, natural gas pipelines, and all that newfangled infrastructure nonsense. You spent a shitload of money and moved up for the environment because it's better than home. You're more than welcome to stay, but if you preferred everything back in the City you might want to consider moving back. Not that we want you to leave, but we don't want to change the nature of the entire town just to make you happy.:)
Re:Cold Sweats
on
Robotic Mold
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I, for one, will welcome our robotic overslimelords.
As a welcoming present, I present this extra jumbo can of Athete's Foot spray to you in the interests of peaceful coexistenc.. FFFFFFSSSSHHH!!!!!
But the question is - which woke you up? The big-ass freaking BOOM or the mangled shreds of pickup tailgate bits poking holes in the side of your house?:)
There are three sentences in the entire article. Sentence 2 reads: "Noting the success of the DS, PSP and iPhone, Hilleman slammed the price of producing console games has rocketed, with marketing costing up to three times more than the development of a title."
If being able to read and comprehend three consecutive sentences makes one a dicknut, then I accept the title with pride. What, pray tell, is your epithet to describe someone who cannot?;)
No, the development vs. marketing cost was not the main thrust of the article, but it's an interesting point. I would have preferred to see an article that actually talked about it in more detail, and possibly contained more than a one-liner from a badly "[source needed]" post on a gamer board, but it is still an interesting point.
If Google Books eliminates scarcity, that's a good thing. This was the original purpose of libraries themselves, allowing anyone access to any book they want to read for free, and if Google can become "Library 2.0", great.
It will not, however, eliminate the need for "Library 1.0". I don't know about your library, but ours is a vibrant community center. Sure, they sign out books, but if you eliminated every book from the library they'd still have patrons in there every day. You can hold meetings there in one of the conference rooms, you can access the Internet, there are programs for children and adults there (OK, many of them centered around books, so if you eliminated all the books someone would have to bring some... grin).
And, of course, there are still a few of us 40+ grumpy old curmudgeons who simply prefer the feel of real paper in our hands when we read. Not that I'd mind an e-book terribly, but holding actual dead trees has become part of the reading experience to us.
I'm sure there are some libraries that have turned into emotionless, community-less book repositories, but there are a good number of them that will survive long after the desire for printed book material goes away, if it ever does.
PS: Now if my local library could get access to Google Books, allowing me to anonymously get ebooks through them and Google would only be aware of my library's credentials, with my library protecting my privacy, that'd be a serious win.
Right, and that's what the librarians are doing. Making sure users make an informed decision.
I don't think any librarian on the planet wants Google Books to go away. It's going to be a massively valuable resource for research, in addition to being unimaginably valuable in terms of preserving books that might go out of print and become so rare that no one can ever get access to them. For keepers of the written word, this is as close to a holy grail as they'll ever get.
But it does come at a cost to the end user - there will be a central database containing lots of information on what you read, research, etc. A database owned by a company that's already shown reluctance to give up a scrap of its hard-earned data.
This isn't the Apocalypse, or anything like that, and Google is hardly the worst offender in terms of privacy violation, but they have made a decent business model out of buying your privacy from you. I think the librarians make a good point, "caveat emptor", but go ahead and buy if you are aware.
PS: Before anyone thinks I'm a crazed paranoid, I happily use Facebook, Gmail, Google Docs, Google News, Google Voice, Google Maps, Google Earth, etc. I'm selling bits of my privacy for convenient tools. I'm doing so with the full knowledge of the value of what I'm selling and feel I'm getting a useful service in return.
The article didn't mention blood pressure specifically, but did make mention of a number of obesity-related issues that could be the more direct cause for the brain tissue loss.
And, of course, the article also mentions the possibility that the brain tissue loss may be causing the weight gain in the first place.
BTW thanks. It was tough, but the rewards are significant.;)
Need? Who said anything about need? Look at the title again - "Nokia is launching..."
This is being launched on a phone because it's being launched by a company that makes phones.
Sure, this could all be done with a credit card and an RFID chip, but then Nokia wouldn't be launching it, would they?:)
Nokia wants your phone to be your phone, your Internet connection and email client, your camera, and now your wallet. The more functions they can put on a phone and have them generally accepted, the more people will need to carry them, and if this payment system is exclusive to Nokia phones you're more likely to buy one.
Slashdot Mirror
FAT itself is proprietary, true. However, it's readily accessible through non-proprietary software. MP3 is the same - it's technically proprietary, but it's also an industry standard that is readily accessible.
I can take my $15 1GB MP3 and my BlackBerry both and hook them up to my Windows box *and* my Linux box without loading any software from anyone - support for standard USB flash drives is built into both operating systems (and, I'd assume, Mac). To the operating system, they look like any other USB flash drive out there.
I can put anything I want on the drives, and if it's MP3 (also proprietary, but also readily accessible in most platforms) both units will recognize it and allow me to play it as music.
I didn't have to install anything anywhere to be able to do this. No drivers, no software, no nothing. Plug 'em in and start copying music. Done.
But my wife's iPod Touch needs iTunes (proprietary software) installed on the Windows box, and I'd have to install software on the Linux box to support it.
Don't get me wrong, I think the iPod Touch is an awesome gizmo. But it does have drawbacks.
PS: And I cannot name the specific company or even where it was, but I do remember one of the duck tours I took handing out plastic duck calls.
Since I've never been in California in my life, I can safely assume it was neither company named in the suit.
Since it was long enough ago that I cannot recall the company or the state, it was probably at least 20 years ago, meaning it probably predates the practice in California, if not both companies.
Since I can neither name the company nor the state, I guess my assertion is pretty much worthless, but to my knowledge handing out plastic duck calls is NOT unique to one company.
Ford trademarked a blue oval because they were the first company that used a blue oval in association with automobiles. DuPont, same deal, different color and industry.
DUKW boats, Duck Tours, pictures of ducks, and quacking noises are pretty clearly associated. I have yet to get on a duck boat and NOT get told by the tour operator that I'm to quack at everyone I see. It's part of the gag.
True, most boat operators don't hand out plastic duck calls, but the association of duck calls with the DUKW boats is clearly there (do some field research and take a tour sometime - they are fun, if more than a little silly).
Trademarking the specific sound that a duck call makes and differentiating it from the other ways of making duck-like sounds is rather a fine differentiation, when quacking sounds have been a part of the whole Duck Tour experience since, well, the first Duck Tour...
I came to the sudden realization after reading more of the comments that most /.ers are probably only hearing of Duck Tours for the first time. I guess they are more of a niche market than I thought.
Anyway, they are not at all uncommon, and they all follow the same basic business model.
1) Buy a few DUKWs, fix 'em up and spray-paint them in bright colors,
2) come up with a picture of a duck to represent your company, almost always a bright yellow duck
3) develop a route that allows you to do a tour on both land and flat water,
4) hire/license guides and teach them a few interesting tidbits about the route, and tell them to tell their riders to quack to everyone they see,
5) profit.
Actually, if one of the companies were to simply paint their boats black and white, they could have a LOON tour and they'd be absolutely unique in the industry (to my knowledge at least). Then they'd have a really good case to soundmark a loon cry as an associative sound with land/water tours, and they'd be clearly differentiated from their competitors.
Or just pick your bird. Anything but a duck, because EVERYONE uses a duck, and EVERYONE makes quacking noises. You aren't differentiating, even if you make your own distinctive plastic quacker thingie - you're copying what EVERYONE ELSE has already done, just putting a teeny variation on the theme. And that shouldn't be trademark-worthy.
Use an industry-standard USB cable for charging AND data transfer without having to resort to proprietary cabling?
Replace the battery?
Upgrade the memory?
Access the data onboard using "mass storage" (like USB memory stick) in the operating system of your choice without the need for proprietary software?
There are a decent number of them around the country. Portland, Maine has one. I'm pretty sure there are a couple still in Florida (I took one in Bradenton once, but I think that company has since folded). There used to be one in Cincinnati, Ohio. A quick Google search has one in Arkansas and one in Philadelphia, and those are just on the first page.
I've been on about a half dozen (and I've never been to California, so neither of the operators in the suit ran any of them I've been on). Quacking is just part of the shtick.
If there's copy-catting going on here, then both operators are equally guilty. Duck sounds have been associated with every Duck Tour I've done, and the whole reason they are called Duck Tours is because they use a military surplus DUKW. It's a blatantly obvious pun, and quacking sounds are as clearly associated with duck tours as bells are to trolleys, whistles are to trains, and driving by ignoring your outstretched hand is to taxis.
There may be a larger body of people who have never heard of or taken a Duck Tour, but they are pretty much the same throughout the country, and I don't think either company can lay claim to having invented the concept of using a DUKW and calling it a "Duck Boat" to use for tours. Neither can either company lay claim to having established the association of quacking with ducks.
For the former, we can thank whomever came up with the DUKW designation used to identify the boats that most of the operators use, and it's a 1950s boat if I recall correctly, so it predates any of the companies that bought them as military surplus and painted them bright colors.
For the latter, I think we can thank actual ducks.
There are LOTS of companies in the US that offer so-called "Duck Tours". The name isn't a coincidence, it's a play on the name of the boat used (DUKW, a US Military surplus amphibious vehicle). And every single one of them that I've heard of uses the same name for the same reason, and continues the pun by encouraging their customers to make quacking noises. It's a generic name and business model, not a specific brand.
And, yes, they are really silly. But they're fun, and quite often an interesting tour of the waterfront from the road, then the same stretch from the river. I've been Duck Tours run by at least a half dozen different companies, and in all of them you can expect:
A: a brightly-colored DUKW or a newer boat that's been made to look like one,
B: a tour that involves driving on land for a while, then driving straight into the water somewhere, tooling around on the water, then coming back out on land, and
C: everyone on board will be making quacking noises at the request of the tour guide / driver.
Sure, but most "Duck Tour" companies have the same or a similar association. The name "Duck" comes from the boats they use (military surplus DUKW amphibious boats), so the association with ducks isn't unique to any one tour company. And I have yet to be on a "Duck" tour where the tour drivers didn't suggest that you make goofy duck sounds, and a couple even handed out cheap plastic duck calls. It's all part of the same pun that every single Duck Tour operator uses as their shtick.
Now, if someone used a DUKW to make a DUKE tour and had everyone dress up as John Wayne and yell lines from his movies, OK, that would be a differentiating factor. No one's done that one yet. "Head 'em up and move 'em out, pardner!"
Similarly, if they were to use some other noise, like kazoos or ukeleles, they'd get the same annoyance factor but it would be different from everyone else's, and therefore unique and trademarkable. But Duck Tour equals Duck Sounds is not only common, it's cliche.
They could probably trademark their sound if they asked everyone NOT to make duck sounds. Because they'd be the only ones in the business who did.
But I don't see how something that is common practice could be trademarkable. It's like trademarking using a bell for a trolley so no other company in the country could use a bell, or using a lighted sign on the roof of a vehicle to indicate the vehicle is a taxi, or a barber's pole to indicate a barber.
If I hear quacking noises and laughter coming from the middle of the street next to me or a river nearby, I'll be completely unsurprised if I look up and see a DUKW in bright colors with a bunch of people on board. I won't necessarily expect to see any specific company's DUKW.
Most "Duck Tour" operators are employing a common pun, since most use surplus military DUKW amphibious vehicles.
But it's a VERY common theme, so most of the company logos are some sort of stylized duck in or around the water, or splashing water, often wearing raingear.
Every duck tour I've been on (and it's been a decent handful) has also associated some form of quacking noise with the experience (some use cheap plastic duck calls they hand out, others just ask their customers to shout "QUACK QUACK!"). So a duck call may be incidentally associated with a Duck Tour, but they are incidentally associated with each and every Duck Tour I've been on, and that's at least a half dozen of them in nearly as many states.
Since it's a common association, I don't see how it could be considered a competitive differentiating factor for a specific company.
IANAL, though.
IANAL, but...
I've been on several duck tours, from several different companies in different states. Every one of them asked their customers to make some form of quacking noise (to the mixed amusement and annoyance of people around us - one taxi driver in Boston quite memorably shouted back "QUACK THIS!" and stuck up his middle finger, but I digress). Several (not the plaintiff or defendant in this case) even handed out cheap plastic duck noisemakers as part of the ticket price.
I'd have a hard time believing that trademarking the sound of a duck noisemaker quacking as a representation of a specific duck tour company would hold up in court. It's a common theme amongst all duck tour companies, and an obvious association. "I'm climbing on board a colorfully-painted DUKW, I see pictures of ducks, and I hear quacking noises from excited passengers, yup, I'm on a Duck Tour all right!"
Now if this company CUSTOM-DESIGNED a duck quacker thingie and handed out those, and they sounded markedly different from any commonly-available duck call, I could see trademarking THAT sound. I could even see soundmarking the use of, say, a kazoo on a duck tour. That would be a differentiating factor, because it's a noisemaker not usually associated with duck tours.
Previously-cited examples include a lion's roar to denote a film company, or three notes or a picture of a peacock to differentiate one TV station from another. But MGM can't prevent anyone from playing a lion's roar during a nature documentary on Africa, and NBC couldn't prevent someone from using a picture of a peacock (even a rival network) as part of a television show. Trademarks must be unique (complex company logo) or uniquely applied (the word WINDOWS to describe a computer operating system).
But this is a common sound, made by a commonly-available kids toy, that is also commonly associated with duck tours. I can't see how one duck tour operator could suddenly decide he has exclusive rights to use the sound in association with duck tours, when many of them have done so for years.
If the group used kazoos, OK, there we have a serious differentiating factor. Kazoo "music" is not normally associated with duck tours, so all they have to do is say "XYZ Duck Tours. It's a kaZOO out there!" in their ads, hand out crappy plastic kazoos shaped like duck beaks, and BAM! (trademark Emeril Legassi, but only for cooking!) - trademarkable image/sound association with their specific duck tour. It'd be quirky enough to differentiate them and be a unique image for their company. Easily unique enough to trademark.
It's still a common sound made from a common device, so CUSTOMERS of their rivals are free to use it while riding, but their rivals could not legitimately use kazoos or kazoo sounds as part of their promotion or advertising.
Well, another good reason for not introducing gravity into the ISS is because many/most of the experiments done there are microgravity experiments. Why spend all the money to get up there and then make the environment just like Earth? Rather defeats the point.
It's like city folk moving up here to Maine then expecting town water, town sewer, natural gas pipelines, and all that newfangled infrastructure nonsense. You spent a shitload of money and moved up for the environment because it's better than home. You're more than welcome to stay, but if you preferred everything back in the City you might want to consider moving back. Not that we want you to leave, but we don't want to change the nature of the entire town just to make you happy. :)
I, for one, will welcome our robotic overslimelords.
As a welcoming present, I present this extra jumbo can of Athete's Foot spray to you in the interests of peaceful coexistenc.. FFFFFFSSSSHHH!!!!!
Can empty, problem solved.
You keep your gam cackers n apple joose at the top of a clocktower? Isn't that terribly inconvenient?
Someone please mod parent +1 for using the term "apropos of nothing" correctly, and another point for correct spelling of same. (light applause)
No, he blew a hole in his own tailgate with his wad. THAT, my friend, takes talent.
But the question is - which woke you up? The big-ass freaking BOOM or the mangled shreds of pickup tailgate bits poking holes in the side of your house? :)
Ah, I see. I'll keep that in mind. :)
There are three sentences in the entire article. Sentence 2 reads: "Noting the success of the DS, PSP and iPhone, Hilleman slammed the price of producing console games has rocketed, with marketing costing up to three times more than the development of a title."
If being able to read and comprehend three consecutive sentences makes one a dicknut, then I accept the title with pride. What, pray tell, is your epithet to describe someone who cannot? ;)
No, the development vs. marketing cost was not the main thrust of the article, but it's an interesting point. I would have preferred to see an article that actually talked about it in more detail, and possibly contained more than a one-liner from a badly "[source needed]" post on a gamer board, but it is still an interesting point.
If Google Books eliminates scarcity, that's a good thing. This was the original purpose of libraries themselves, allowing anyone access to any book they want to read for free, and if Google can become "Library 2.0", great.
It will not, however, eliminate the need for "Library 1.0". I don't know about your library, but ours is a vibrant community center. Sure, they sign out books, but if you eliminated every book from the library they'd still have patrons in there every day. You can hold meetings there in one of the conference rooms, you can access the Internet, there are programs for children and adults there (OK, many of them centered around books, so if you eliminated all the books someone would have to bring some... grin).
And, of course, there are still a few of us 40+ grumpy old curmudgeons who simply prefer the feel of real paper in our hands when we read. Not that I'd mind an e-book terribly, but holding actual dead trees has become part of the reading experience to us.
I'm sure there are some libraries that have turned into emotionless, community-less book repositories, but there are a good number of them that will survive long after the desire for printed book material goes away, if it ever does.
PS: Now if my local library could get access to Google Books, allowing me to anonymously get ebooks through them and Google would only be aware of my library's credentials, with my library protecting my privacy, that'd be a serious win.
Right, and that's what the librarians are doing. Making sure users make an informed decision.
I don't think any librarian on the planet wants Google Books to go away. It's going to be a massively valuable resource for research, in addition to being unimaginably valuable in terms of preserving books that might go out of print and become so rare that no one can ever get access to them. For keepers of the written word, this is as close to a holy grail as they'll ever get.
But it does come at a cost to the end user - there will be a central database containing lots of information on what you read, research, etc. A database owned by a company that's already shown reluctance to give up a scrap of its hard-earned data.
This isn't the Apocalypse, or anything like that, and Google is hardly the worst offender in terms of privacy violation, but they have made a decent business model out of buying your privacy from you. I think the librarians make a good point, "caveat emptor", but go ahead and buy if you are aware.
PS: Before anyone thinks I'm a crazed paranoid, I happily use Facebook, Gmail, Google Docs, Google News, Google Voice, Google Maps, Google Earth, etc. I'm selling bits of my privacy for convenient tools. I'm doing so with the full knowledge of the value of what I'm selling and feel I'm getting a useful service in return.
Know the facts, THEN make your choice.
Great idea. Then we all know who is secure because of their typing style. Let me implement this, hang on a second..
YEAH WORKED GREAT I FEEL MORE SECURE ALREADY THANKS FOR THE TIP!!!
The article didn't mention blood pressure specifically, but did make mention of a number of obesity-related issues that could be the more direct cause for the brain tissue loss.
And, of course, the article also mentions the possibility that the brain tissue loss may be causing the weight gain in the first place.
BTW thanks. It was tough, but the rewards are significant. ;)
Need? Who said anything about need? Look at the title again - "Nokia is launching..."
This is being launched on a phone because it's being launched by a company that makes phones.
Sure, this could all be done with a credit card and an RFID chip, but then Nokia wouldn't be launching it, would they? :)
Nokia wants your phone to be your phone, your Internet connection and email client, your camera, and now your wallet. The more functions they can put on a phone and have them generally accepted, the more people will need to carry them, and if this payment system is exclusive to Nokia phones you're more likely to buy one.