In situations like this, I would be careful the source. This is coming from an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, which is extraordinarily conservative. I'm not saying that this isn't a shameful example of the Pentagon getting bogged down in bureaucracy. But anything coming out of the Wall St Journal's editorial board smacks of political agenda. In this case "government == bad. free enterprise == good". And this is one of the directors of the editorial board to boot.
Didn't the do not call list go into effect sometime in 2003? If so, how have you had to re-register already? It's only been 3 years at most for you (I registered immediately and I have until 6/2008).
Sony Ericsson is a joint venture between Sony and Ericsson which are separate entities (think about MSNBC -- NBC and M$ are independent but got together and made something, well, crappy)
I think he got the order of his debian trees wrong. He had it at stable>>unstable>>testing. It's stable>> testing>> unstable. Testing is to test it before it becomes stable. Unstable is, of course, unstable. Just in case anyone reads this and uses the info. And yes, i'm being pedantic:)
I went and took a look at their website again and it's as though nothing has changed. And, the info that is there is complete crap. This comment in the previous article about them points off some pretty glaring problems with them that just screams SCAM!
Still, it's fun to see this stuff posted tearing this kind of BS apart.
I've always wondered how these companies track useage. Webside Story, who gets a posting now and then about browser useage, uses the Nielson approach and only has a limited sample of willing participants. This article is citing "Net Applications" who appear to have some product called hitslink. I've never seen a site using this and, as someone paranoid about being tracked in anyway, when I look at the ad-block info for a page, i'll immediately block anything that smacks of tracking (so they won't ever pick me up, because i'm blocking all requests from hitslink.com)
On a more pleasant note, I'm pleased to see that my whole IT group has made the firefox switch and, not to be boastful, I can take credit for starting that trend:)
i dont think this is an issue of "tech savvy-ness". He claims that Pink sells more albums officially because her listeners are not as technically inclined? Let think about their demographics. I'm no expert, but i would guess that pink caters to a relatively affluent suburban girl. These people probably have a fast new computer which has a CD burner that is set up in a way that a monkey could use it. Why would these people be unable to burn a CD or 7 for their friends? The technology isn't that hard any more to copy music. it has nothing to do with someones knowledge of computers.
I think Moby is doing exactly what the RIAA has been doing. Blaming technology for his lack of sales. CD sales are down because the economy is in the shitter and Moby appeals to an older crowd who don't have mommy and daddy buying their CDs (like pink) and, because of their lack of jobs or fear of losing work, are watching what they are spending and overpriced CDs are on the chopping block on superfluous expenses. Period.
With this and the recent article from cnn about Verisign auctioning.bz domain names, I have to wonder, who is actually buying up all these domain names. Most people I know have little interest in buyin a domain ending in.biz or.bz or.name or.pro. Three years ago, everyone was crying about the decreasing number of.com domains. Now you have.ws,.tv,.la,.bz,.pro,.biz,.who-cares. And let's not forget new.net. One minute it's an open market the next minute, you're flooded with TLDs, mostly from poor small countries who are receiving big fat checks from these foolish companies desparate to have a premiuim service for domain registrations.
I'll wager in the next few years, a number of the alternative TLD companies will be long gone and we'll be back to the standard 3-6 TLDs as well as each country's TLD for it's citizens.
For those of you whining about how Disney owns Jim Henson Studios, please note that this is not true. According to their website, they are wholly owned by EM.TV, which, as far as I could ascertain from their site, is an independent German media conglomerate of sorts. Whether this is better or not, who knows?:)
As for Disney, if my history is correct, right before Jim Henson died, he was negotiating to sell the studio to Disney but, after his death, his sons nixed the deal.
Slashdot Mirror
In situations like this, I would be careful the source. This is coming from an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, which is extraordinarily conservative. I'm not saying that this isn't a shameful example of the Pentagon getting bogged down in bureaucracy. But anything coming out of the Wall St Journal's editorial board smacks of political agenda. In this case "government == bad. free enterprise == good". And this is one of the directors of the editorial board to boot.
Just my 3 cents.
Didn't the do not call list go into effect sometime in 2003? If so, how have you had to re-register already? It's only been 3 years at most for you (I registered immediately and I have until 6/2008).
Ericsson: Sony owns them.
Sony Ericsson is a joint venture between Sony and Ericsson which are separate entities (think about MSNBC -- NBC and M$ are independent but got together and made something, well, crappy)
Since /. posters are always too lazy to find the reg-free link, here you all go:
l ley.html?ex=1282536000&en=344e9c533c3980cc&ei=5090 &partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/24/technology/24va
I think he got the order of his debian trees wrong. He had it at stable>>unstable>>testing. It's stable>> testing>> unstable. Testing is to test it before it becomes stable. Unstable is, of course, unstable. Just in case anyone reads this and uses the info. And yes, i'm being pedantic :)
I went and took a look at their website again and it's as though nothing has changed. And, the info that is there is complete crap. This comment in the previous article about them points off some pretty glaring problems with them that just screams SCAM!
Still, it's fun to see this stuff posted tearing this kind of BS apart.
I've always wondered how these companies track useage. Webside Story, who gets a posting now and then about browser useage, uses the Nielson approach and only has a limited sample of willing participants. This article is citing "Net Applications" who appear to have some product called hitslink. I've never seen a site using this and, as someone paranoid about being tracked in anyway, when I look at the ad-block info for a page, i'll immediately block anything that smacks of tracking (so they won't ever pick me up, because i'm blocking all requests from hitslink.com)
:)
On a more pleasant note, I'm pleased to see that my whole IT group has made the firefox switch and, not to be boastful, I can take credit for starting that trend
i dont think this is an issue of "tech savvy-ness". He claims that Pink sells more albums officially because her listeners are not as technically inclined? Let think about their demographics. I'm no expert, but i would guess that pink caters to a relatively affluent suburban girl. These people probably have a fast new computer which has a CD burner that is set up in a way that a monkey could use it. Why would these people be unable to burn a CD or 7 for their friends? The technology isn't that hard any more to copy music. it has nothing to do with someones knowledge of computers.
I think Moby is doing exactly what the RIAA has been doing. Blaming technology for his lack of sales. CD sales are down because the economy is in the shitter and Moby appeals to an older crowd who don't have mommy and daddy buying their CDs (like pink) and, because of their lack of jobs or fear of losing work, are watching what they are spending and overpriced CDs are on the chopping block on superfluous expenses. Period.
I'll wager in the next few years, a number of the alternative TLD companies will be long gone and we'll be back to the standard 3-6 TLDs as well as each country's TLD for it's citizens.
As for Disney, if my history is correct, right before Jim Henson died, he was negotiating to sell the studio to Disney but, after his death, his sons nixed the deal.