Why in hell would a major company (i.e. we're not talking garage bands here) that wants to distribute content legally want to use the Napster model, particularly for HUGE content?
It's not to hard to envision a way to make this work. Make it a subscription service and give everyone on the service a super-high bandwidth internet line as part of it. Partition the movie across many different machines in segments to solve the size problem. Play as you go. Heck, you could even get the part of the movie you are watching from somebody else who is watching it at about the same time (i.e. as it loads on their drive it speeds over to yours slightly behind). Once everyone is done with the segment it deletes off their drive, then off your drive in a cascade. This would relieve tons of pressure on the main servers which would only be required to start the process.
This could all be managed from some kind of load balancing software. You could even have it seemlessly move you over to the exact needed spot in a show on another machine if you lost your connection to the original source...
Uhh, actually, forget I said all this. I'm running over to the patent office...
The Chinese, not Japanese, regard the number 4 as unlucky because it has a similar sound to the word for death.
So they will probably have to change the name to sell it in Taiwan.
Off subject- we have a cab company in my town which has the phone number 444-4444 emblazened on the sides of their cars. Needless to say, no Chinese people in my town ever ride in them.
It's not just pretty pictures as most people think it is. It's one of the few games that makes you think about what to do next.
The real reason for the success of Myst was that it was a well developed world with a great deal of hidden history and background. This is always what distinguishes great art from mediocre art.
Tolkien's trilogy was a success because it has a huge amount of background detail to it. The languages, culture, and history was developed by him before the work. Once this was accomplished he could draw upon it in the writing. One got the sense that the work itself was just the tip of the iceburg. Myst accomplished this also, both visually and as a story (not to the same degree of course...).
What Harvard did was merely polite. If you received money from Coke, you shouldn't serve Pepsi.
If coke donates money to an educational institution then they have no right to say what that institution should do. Including whether or not they serve Pepsi.
In this case it ceases to be a donation and becomes sponsorship. And this carries all the problems associated with sponsorship. Should Coke be allowed to change the curriculum?
This has already occured in Japanese elementary schools where the sponsors have workbooks containing numerous images and references to animated TV characters. How far do you want this to go? Believe me, there is a danger of a slippery slope and you won't like the final result.
Open Source is all about "better code" or "better security" or "faster development". Free Software is about the human (especially programmer) rights.
In what sense does this apply to copyrighted code? Would proprietary open source code be available for modification? In other words, would the programming community be allowed to fix it or add to it? If so, would we even bother, since our work would go toward the enriching of someone else.
Could a company that released proprietary open source reward people who fixed or added to it and resubmitted it? How would this work exactly?
Harvard should have realized that they do in fact have a great deal of power here. They could easily have said- "No we will not cover the Macs, and if you insist, then you can just pull your money out of here."
Intel would have caved completely. Imagine the press reporting that Intel refused to sponsor Harvard because they would not cover the Macs.
Seems like the problem here is cowardice on both sides. Remember that bullies are as much cowards as those who don't stand up to them.
Is the causality violation this: since we could get a message and observe the person before they send it- wouldn't this imply then that theoretically you could send a message back saying- "don't send the message" which would arrive before the person sends it. So the message would never be sent?
What is really strange about the speed of light is that it cannot even be violated in a relative sense. e.g. If I travel in a spaceship at 99.9% the speed of light and you travel in the opposite direction at 99.9% the speed of light, I do not (and cannot) perceive you traveling at faster than light. Light from your ship would still reach me so we would actually be receeding from each other at 99.999...% the speed of light. Although to a "stationary" observer we are receeding at almost 200% C. This accounts for the slowdown in time that we would experience relative to that observer.
Regulon can be the food supply
on
The Regulon
·
· Score: 1
What a dumb theory. The regulon for information is how many people are willing to read it or use it. Since there are a finite amount of people (and time to read) then information will not spread beyond that point.
If cuttlefish multiply, eventually they run outta food and their numbers will be thinned.
If nobody reads CNN then CNN will die. Plenty of sites have closed down lately due to lack of readership. Duh!
Slashdot Mirror
It's not to hard to envision a way to make this work. Make it a subscription service and give everyone on the service a super-high bandwidth internet line as part of it. Partition the movie across many different machines in segments to solve the size problem. Play as you go. Heck, you could even get the part of the movie you are watching from somebody else who is watching it at about the same time (i.e. as it loads on their drive it speeds over to yours slightly behind). Once everyone is done with the segment it deletes off their drive, then off your drive in a cascade. This would relieve tons of pressure on the main servers which would only be required to start the process.
This could all be managed from some kind of load balancing software. You could even have it seemlessly move you over to the exact needed spot in a show on another machine if you lost your connection to the original source...
Uhh, actually, forget I said all this. I'm running over to the patent office...
The Chinese, not Japanese, regard the number 4 as unlucky because it has a similar sound to the word for death.
So they will probably have to change the name to sell it in Taiwan.
Off subject- we have a cab company in my town which has the phone number 444-4444 emblazened on the sides of their cars. Needless to say, no Chinese people in my town ever ride in them.
Off topic but can't the net gods make some new endings to addresses of domain names so that these kind of issues can be avoided.
How about
How about
Wait, how about
etc. etc.
The real reason for the success of Myst was that it was a well developed world with a great deal of hidden history and background. This is always what distinguishes great art from mediocre art.
Tolkien's trilogy was a success because it has a huge amount of background detail to it. The languages, culture, and history was developed by him before the work. Once this was accomplished he could draw upon it in the writing. One got the sense that the work itself was just the tip of the iceburg. Myst accomplished this also, both visually and as a story (not to the same degree of course...).
What Harvard did was merely polite. If you received money from Coke, you shouldn't serve Pepsi.
If coke donates money to an educational institution then they have no right to say what that institution should do. Including whether or not they serve Pepsi.
In this case it ceases to be a donation and becomes sponsorship. And this carries all the problems associated with sponsorship. Should Coke be allowed to change the curriculum?
This has already occured in Japanese elementary schools where the sponsors have workbooks containing numerous images and references to animated TV characters. How far do you want this to go? Believe me, there is a danger of a slippery slope and you won't like the final result.
You can already load all the infocom text adventures into a Newton or Palm pilot. What's the big deal?
I bought an Infocom CD with 30 games on it for US$20 years ago and played all of them on my Newton with YAZI.
My brother has a palm pilot and can do the same.
This was all 2-3 years ago. Is there something I'm not understanding about this new technology?
In what sense does this apply to copyrighted code? Would proprietary open source code be available for modification? In other words, would the programming community be allowed to fix it or add to it? If so, would we even bother, since our work would go toward the enriching of someone else.
Could a company that released proprietary open source reward people who fixed or added to it and resubmitted it? How would this work exactly?
Harvard should have realized that they do in fact have a great deal of power here. They could easily have said- "No we will not cover the Macs, and if you insist, then you can just pull your money out of here."
Intel would have caved completely. Imagine the press reporting that Intel refused to sponsor Harvard because they would not cover the Macs.
Seems like the problem here is cowardice on both sides. Remember that bullies are as much cowards as those who don't stand up to them.
What is really strange about the speed of light is that it cannot even be violated in a relative sense. e.g. If I travel in a spaceship at 99.9% the speed of light and you travel in the opposite direction at 99.9% the speed of light, I do not (and cannot) perceive you traveling at faster than light. Light from your ship would still reach me so we would actually be receeding from each other at 99.999...% the speed of light. Although to a "stationary" observer we are receeding at almost 200% C. This accounts for the slowdown in time that we would experience relative to that observer.
What a dumb theory. The regulon for information is how many people are willing to read it or use it. Since there are a finite amount of people (and time to read) then information will not spread beyond that point.
If cuttlefish multiply, eventually they run outta food and their numbers will be thinned.
If nobody reads CNN then CNN will die. Plenty of sites have closed down lately due to lack of readership. Duh!