Many times you don't know what the benefit of a science experiment/project will be, not till many years after that. Maybe it started as some kind of pet project (no pun intended), and maybe that's all it will ever amount to. But maybe in a few years we'll see applications for this. Sometimes we just do stuff to "goof around" and we may be surprised at the results. Example: Google's "20% time " revolves exactly around this idea, and it has been very productive. Now, you might say that I would think differently if the PacMan game involved dogs and not Paramecium, and I would probably agree. In all experiment we have to weight the suffering of the subject with the visible benefit of the project. Paramecium is a protozoa , which is a primitive organism with no nervous system (second paragraph), while a dog is a much more advanced organism which shows obvious signs of suffering when hurt. If you would argue that "useless" experiments on all organisms are prohibited, it will be a huge hinderence to science and in the long run might prevent the development of life saving inventions. And yes, there is a hidden assumption that human life is more important than Paramicium's; if we don't agree on that, we will have a hard time agreeing on anything else regarding this subject.
Maybe I wasn't clear. My point was that I know usage statistics are not a perfect way to differentiate legitimate and illegitimate uses of RS, however, they can give you some idea of the magnitude of phenomenon, esp. if combined with file type. I agree that there are other scenarios where RS is used for one-to-many sharing, where the file shared is legal. However, I do believe (no citation) that most cases of a file being downloaded by 10,000 different people (esp. if it is a 700MB movie file), are illegal. If I see a source code file or Excel spreadsheet shared by many people, it is probably a legitimate use.
Again, this is not a perfect method to be used as court evidence, but it can give you a first-order estimate of the magnitude of the problem.
1) As of last year, Android devices sold more than iPhones and it is gaining (if not already overtaking) iPhone's marketshare. Sure there are other iOS devices, other than iPhone, but you cannot say you do not have another viable option. 2) In case you don't know it already, you do not pay companies for the price it cost them to create the product/service you buy. The cost you pay reflects the value you perceive the product is worth. In your example, your App is sold 1000 times at $0.99 with 30% going to Apple. That leaves you with about $700, for a $100 investment. I don't know how much time it took you to write this program, so I can't say if it is worth your time, but this is not a bad ROI. Why go with the App Store and not with your own hosting service? Because in the App Store you get more exposure and a chance at more downloads. Hence, you get added value - which is why you pay the fee.
Or, if you want to look it from another perspective: They created an ecosystem with enough appeal to attract users. Now the developer has one place where he can post an app and it is available to paying customers. In exchange for this very tidy system, they charge a usage/registration fee. Sounds reasonable. Whether the fee is worth it, is the developer's call. If you think it's too steep, go post your app someplace else (Android, WebOS, Windows, Mac, Linux). Of course, let's just call it "extortionate" and thus we can continue to bash Apple/MS (Sorry, I lost track over who we are attacking).
I was actually interested in who the burden of proof is on: RS in calling defamation or MarkMonitor in calling RS an accessory to piracy. Any lawyers in the house ready to comment?
Well, it boils down to what statistics you use: Number/percentage of illegal files on RS or number/percentage of illegal downloads? Of course, RS would choose the former statistics and MarkMonitor would choose the latter.
Oh, and BTW, condolences to your ass. It must hurt after all the statistics you pulled out of it:)
P.S. Do you know it's very hard to type after drinking a couple of glasses of wine. It took me forever to write this without mistakes.
This is called selection bias. People who use RS for legitimate use, share the links with the intended recipient only. The files are not searched by anonymous people throughout the web on these sites. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't search http://rapidsharesearcher.com/ for "Presentation for 2011 shareholder meeting.pps". You are using sites that are used by people who d/l illegal files to show that RS is used for illegal d/l. If you look into Toyota's site, you would see that most of the searches on that site are for cars made by Toyota. Ergo, most people drive Toyota!
Since the parent was discussing how Rapidshare can know whether the files they are hosting are legal or not, my argument stands. RS does have access to the d/l logs and thus can claim that illegal d/l are a minor part of their business. As you said, MarkMonitor doesn't have access to the logs, so it better have some other evidence, or the defamation accusations will probably stick.
Evil is killing people. Selling a product that is closed, when the potential buyers know about it beforehand, is not evil. If you do not tell the buyers, but surprise them later, it is deceptive - which is bad, but I still wouldn't call it Evil. Perspective, man.
P.S. Since many people (they are called nontechies) like iPhone's closed-garden approach, your "Evil" labeling is less justifiable.
Well, if you see a file uploaded to RS and then it is downloaded by 10,000 users, it is probably not used for legal reasons. If, OTOH, it is downloaded by 1 other user, there is a higher chance it is used for a legal reasons. Of course, this is not conclusive evidence: A file can be sent to a whole group via RS and still be legit, and a movie can be sent illegally from one person to another. But still, usage statistics can give you some idea as to the legality of the files without opening them.
you want a phone that is easy-to-use, hackable, can be customized as much as you want and still have tech support (and even endorsement from the manufacture to jailbreak)? Go with WebOS. Palm (and now HP) have repeatedly shown that they not only do not disapprove of the homebrew scene, but actually encourage it.
You assume that all consumers have the same wishes. Sadly, in most product categories, it is not true. What do you prefer, a phone that works out-of-the-box, no customization needed (or possible), easy-to-use OR a phone that is highly hackable, can do whatever you want, but is harder to use? You might prefer Android, others prefer iPhone. How do you get all of the "consumers" to together against a business strategy that many do not disapprove of?
It's called a "business strategy". You may think its either smart or foolish, but it's a strategy. No one said businesses had to act in a democratic way.
1) Glad to make you happy. I knew you were concerned, so that is why I informed you:) 2) The Pre 2 and WebOS 2.0 are way better than iOS and Android, so I don't feel like I am stuck in the past. You should try it.
P.S. I am not a HP/Palm representative, just a fanboy.
Slashdot Mirror
Many times you don't know what the benefit of a science experiment/project will be, not till many years after that. Maybe it started as some kind of pet project (no pun intended), and maybe that's all it will ever amount to. But maybe in a few years we'll see applications for this. Sometimes we just do stuff to "goof around" and we may be surprised at the results. Example: Google's "20% time " revolves exactly around this idea, and it has been very productive.
Now, you might say that I would think differently if the PacMan game involved dogs and not Paramecium, and I would probably agree. In all experiment we have to weight the suffering of the subject with the visible benefit of the project. Paramecium is a protozoa , which is a primitive organism with no nervous system (second paragraph), while a dog is a much more advanced organism which shows obvious signs of suffering when hurt.
If you would argue that "useless" experiments on all organisms are prohibited, it will be a huge hinderence to science and in the long run might prevent the development of life saving inventions. And yes, there is a hidden assumption that human life is more important than Paramicium's; if we don't agree on that, we will have a hard time agreeing on anything else regarding this subject.
Asimov to the rescue...
Maybe I wasn't clear. My point was that I know usage statistics are not a perfect way to differentiate legitimate and illegitimate uses of RS, however, they can give you some idea of the magnitude of phenomenon, esp. if combined with file type.
I agree that there are other scenarios where RS is used for one-to-many sharing, where the file shared is legal. However, I do believe (no citation) that most cases of a file being downloaded by 10,000 different people (esp. if it is a 700MB movie file), are illegal. If I see a source code file or Excel spreadsheet shared by many people, it is probably a legitimate use.
Again, this is not a perfect method to be used as court evidence, but it can give you a first-order estimate of the magnitude of the problem.
1) As of last year, Android devices sold more than iPhones and it is gaining (if not already overtaking) iPhone's marketshare. Sure there are other iOS devices, other than iPhone, but you cannot say you do not have another viable option.
2) In case you don't know it already, you do not pay companies for the price it cost them to create the product/service you buy. The cost you pay reflects the value you perceive the product is worth.
In your example, your App is sold 1000 times at $0.99 with 30% going to Apple. That leaves you with about $700, for a $100 investment. I don't know how much time it took you to write this program, so I can't say if it is worth your time, but this is not a bad ROI.
Why go with the App Store and not with your own hosting service? Because in the App Store you get more exposure and a chance at more downloads. Hence, you get added value - which is why you pay the fee.
it tingles a little, but I'm glad I stuck to low digit numbers ;)
It's stuck? Ouch!
Of course, this is not conclusive evidence: A file can be sent to a whole group via RS and still be legit...
Wow, have you ever heard about reading the entire comment before responding? (I can continue with the paraphrasing, but I think you get the idea).
It took me forever to write this with just one mistake.
FTFM
Or, if you want to look it from another perspective: They created an ecosystem with enough appeal to attract users. Now the developer has one place where he can post an app and it is available to paying customers. In exchange for this very tidy system, they charge a usage/registration fee. Sounds reasonable. Whether the fee is worth it, is the developer's call. If you think it's too steep, go post your app someplace else (Android, WebOS, Windows, Mac, Linux).
Of course, let's just call it "extortionate" and thus we can continue to bash Apple/MS (Sorry, I lost track over who we are attacking).
I was actually interested in who the burden of proof is on: RS in calling defamation or MarkMonitor in calling RS an accessory to piracy. Any lawyers in the house ready to comment?
Let me be the first to tell you: Whooosh!
+1 Hilarious!
Well, it boils down to what statistics you use: Number/percentage of illegal files on RS or number/percentage of illegal downloads? Of course, RS would choose the former statistics and MarkMonitor would choose the latter.
Oh, and BTW, condolences to your ass. It must hurt after all the statistics you pulled out of it :)
P.S.
Do you know it's very hard to type after drinking a couple of glasses of wine. It took me forever to write this without mistakes.
Alanis Morissette claims prior art
This is called selection bias. People who use RS for legitimate use, share the links with the intended recipient only. The files are not searched by anonymous people throughout the web on these sites. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't search http://rapidsharesearcher.com/ for "Presentation for 2011 shareholder meeting.pps".
You are using sites that are used by people who d/l illegal files to show that RS is used for illegal d/l. If you look into Toyota's site, you would see that most of the searches on that site are for cars made by Toyota. Ergo, most people drive Toyota!
Since the parent was discussing how Rapidshare can know whether the files they are hosting are legal or not, my argument stands. RS does have access to the d/l logs and thus can claim that illegal d/l are a minor part of their business. As you said, MarkMonitor doesn't have access to the logs, so it better have some other evidence, or the defamation accusations will probably stick.
Evil is killing people. Selling a product that is closed, when the potential buyers know about it beforehand, is not evil.
If you do not tell the buyers, but surprise them later, it is deceptive - which is bad, but I still wouldn't call it Evil. Perspective, man.
P.S. Since many people (they are called nontechies) like iPhone's closed-garden approach, your "Evil" labeling is less justifiable.
Well, if you see a file uploaded to RS and then it is downloaded by 10,000 users, it is probably not used for legal reasons. If, OTOH, it is downloaded by 1 other user, there is a higher chance it is used for a legal reasons.
Of course, this is not conclusive evidence: A file can be sent to a whole group via RS and still be legit, and a movie can be sent illegally from one person to another. But still, usage statistics can give you some idea as to the legality of the files without opening them.
you want a phone that is easy-to-use, hackable, can be customized as much as you want and still have tech support (and even endorsement from the manufacture to jailbreak)? Go with WebOS. Palm (and now HP) have repeatedly shown that they not only do not disapprove of the homebrew scene, but actually encourage it.
You assume that all consumers have the same wishes. Sadly, in most product categories, it is not true. What do you prefer, a phone that works out-of-the-box, no customization needed (or possible), easy-to-use OR a phone that is highly hackable, can do whatever you want, but is harder to use?
You might prefer Android, others prefer iPhone. How do you get all of the "consumers" to together against a business strategy that many do not disapprove of?
It's called a "business strategy". You may think its either smart or foolish, but it's a strategy. No one said businesses had to act in a democratic way.
I believe they copy-pasted that page. Stealing is something they can learn from Congress.
Yes it will be biased and partial and rough...
Just like most humans.
More formal reasoning and association techniques, such as bayesian stuff, logic, etc will be also be needed for general AI...
Because we all know that most people use reasoning and bayesian logic everyday.
1) Glad to make you happy. I knew you were concerned, so that is why I informed you :)
2) The Pre 2 and WebOS 2.0 are way better than iOS and Android, so I don't feel like I am stuck in the past. You should try it.
P.S. I am not a HP/Palm representative, just a fanboy.
It's great to have competition, but I, personally, don't care. Just bought a Palm Pre 2, and I ain't looking back.
Of Brian May, of course!
Brought to you by a proud owner of a Brian May Red Special Guitar.