Just because he's right doesn't mean he's right. He has some facts correct, but the conclusion is all wrong. This is typical of anti iTMS iPod Apple rants such as his.
I also made the comparison with WMA files and not knowing which of the "other" players out there support this format (or not), DRMed or not. WMA player is right up there with OGG players, who cares?
And I CAN buy DRM ACC files, and play them on any other ACC player, because stripping the DRM from the files is fairly painless with the right tools.
Again, the problem isn't DRMed ACC files, it is DRM, period. THIS is the problem, not that there aren't any other players that play DRMed ACC files.
What I found funny was my brain was actually translating the grey buttons into slashdot green. Now that I look closer, they are indeed grey. And now all I see is the grey; no more slashdot green.
"Name one player besides Apple's that plays iTMS protected AAC."
I can't tell if you're serious or just stupid. iPods play ACC (DRM or not) and MP3s. They don't play WMA (DRM or not). I don't know of a single player of WMA (DRM or not). I don't doubt that they exist, I'm just saying I don't which one does or doesn't. Mainly I don't care, because who the heck uses WMA (DRM or not)?
There are other players for ACC out there, besides Apple, they just can't play Apple's DRMed version.
So, we're back the least common denominator, MP3. Of which, just about every player will play, including those purchased from Amazon.
And as for Apple's DRM, it is easily circumvented by at least two distinct techniques, one that strips the DRM from the tracks making clear ACC, and one that converts tracks from ACC to CDA back to MP3. I'll admit that is a crappy process, but it exists.
"Apple sells DRM free tracks. But how many people do you know that buy from iTMS that have a DRM free collection?"
Is the point DRM bashing (which I'll agree to) or Apple bashing (which I won't agree to) or User bashing (Maybe I'll agree)?????
I think you're confusing DRM, with Apple with the lUSERs.
"Don't get me wrong. I have an iPod. But I refuse to buy from iTMS"
That's just silly. You're complaint about Apple is really a confusion with DRM. Buy the music you want in DRM free form from where ever it is cheapest for the quality you want. Don't blame Apple for DRM, put the blame where it belongs... with the labels requiring DRM.
Apple sells DRM free tracks, not all tracks are DRM free, but that isn't APPLE's fault, as Apple has clearly stated that DRM free is the way to go. Their hands are tied by the labels.
Not buying from Apple because of DRM is like punching your wife because she told you the neighbor ran your dog over.
That being said, this was a declaration of rebellion, not necessarily for war, although they knew it would lead to war.
BTW, Don't you just love the language in this document? So unambiguous, and eloquent. Everything written today is coded for the ability to morph the meaning when needed. The purpose of government is stated so simply and elegantly....
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed"
If you do something, you piss people off. If you do nothing, you piss people off. It is a lose lose proposition if you think we can avoid pissing people off.
Some people don't need an excuse to be pissed off, they are born pissed off.
Can't make everyone happy either, so we shouldn't even try to make "everyone" happy, because it is impossible.
The point is, and I truly believe this, we should be more judicious in deciding who we are "friends" with. I don't have tons of friends, but I have enought to know each and every one of them is willing to die for me (and me for them).
I suggest that we withdraw all of our troops, not just from Iraq, but from around the whole world. If the complaint is American Colonialism/Imperialism (which is the big one), then this should solve the largest complaint. I really doubt the world would like itself without the US keeping the peace, in spite of the Iraq/Afgan wars.
Think of all the wars that would break out if the US wasn't there to keep things more or less peaceful. Israel, Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Korea, Africa.
I realize that it could be argued that the wars that break out would be the fault of the US for not allowing the natural equilibrium (or whatever) to be adjusted over the years, so this ends up being the same "lose lose" proposition I started with.
This is classic XOR thinking that permeates our society. One or the other, not both is rarely a correct option. It is mostly for boolean operations, which this is clearly not. This is clearly an AND function. More Data AND a Better Algorithm is actually the most correct answer. "Which helps more?" is a silly question except for deciding on how much resources should be split in improving both, along with how much easier is one vs the other.
I'm actually more radical, in some ways than you are. I think we should pull our military home. Period. We should be spending all the money used to keep our troops deployed over seas on incentives going towards high tech weapons and defenses.
Let the world know what its like without the US holding things together for a while.
"Much more difficult is to support your argument with appeals to reason, rather than appeals to emotion."
Republicrats and Demicans both use fear as motivation, because it is powerful. From the "Fear the Terrorists" to the "They'll take your social security away" type tactics of both major parties, fear is used to influence people.
Having said that, it is still easier to write effective "anti" pieces than effective "pro" pieces. Which is why it political hit pieces are more popular.
My wish is to have an election where all parties agree to not mention the others once, and run the whole thing on merit propaganda. It would be interesting to say the least.
Lets say you get your all in one unit, and it has acceptable performance across all converged devices. Let just say it also has a camera, and the camera breaks. What do you do? Replace the whole unit, or buy a digital camera to replace the lost functionality?
I tend to buy things and use them till they are all used up. The car I drive is now 12 years old, I bought it new. I'll drive it till it no longer runs. I don't buy new cars every three years. Same with the toaster (six years old), fridge (five years old), washer(3 years), dryer, table saw(ten years), camera (five years), tv (18 years), printers (six years) and phones (cell phone is three).
About the only exception to this list is computers, but even then, I don't buy new top of the line units to start with. I tend to buy middle of the road, and beef up the ram. Currently, I'm waiting for the 32 bit software world to end before my next computer. While Linux and Vista (and XP, sort of) have 64 bit versions, they are haphazard implementations at best (well, linux less so). Why buy a system that can't address more than 3.6 GB Ram? And why buy a 64 bit system that has no 64bit apps?
The problem is that it is much easier to write antiwhatever propaganda than it is to write prowhatever propaganda.
Really, it is.
Nobody is "pro-war". Well, no reasonable person is. However, there is a time and place for war. So while even I hate war, I also realize that there is a time and place for it. If you are "Anti-war", you can speak against war, generally or specifically, and it is quite easy. And if you speak in general enough terms, I might even agree with much of what you say.
For an exercise in application, try to write a pro-war piece. Most people would have an awful time trying. Now write an Anti-war piece. Just about everyone could.
And no, I'm not making excuses for GWB. In fact, if you want to blame anyone for this, blame congress, who has the power to declare wars and such. And who exactly are we at war with now anyway? It surely isn't the current Government of Iraq, is it?:-D
Well, unlike some people, and probably most geeks, I don't want gadgets hanging from my belt to start, including a phone. I love technology, I love playing with toys, most of these things are nothing more than toys. But I don't play with my toys all day long.
My wife and kids have all these toys, Camaras, iPods. In my life, I've needed a GPS probably once. And who walks around with a GPS every day? Are you that lost?
I hate most PDAs because they tend to change how they work every two years for no appearent reason, other than to change. Just when I figure out how to use it, it changes. Great example is Graffiti's changes between version one, which rocked, and version 2 which sucked so bad I had to get a mini keyboard to be functional, at which point the idea of a PDA became... well a laptop, which was way more functional.
AND you never addressed obsolescence of one of the many devices. My cell phone has a 1.5 MPIX camera, which doesn't compare with my 10 MPIX one I actually use to take photos. Maybe its just that I've never seen an all-in-one that excels as such. Even multi function printers, which are decent, can't compare to discrete component parts.
I'm glad however that you're satisfied with less than state of the art, all-in-ones that when they break you just buy a new one. I wonder what you do when one of the parts breaks? Do you buy whole new unit or just a new standalone unit of what actually no longer works?
"It's pretty much the definition of waste: using a lot of a resource for no, or insufficient gain."
I'll take that definition, and apply it to the Welfare System and all other social programs. After all these years, the war on Poverty has cost us way more than the war on drugs, and has produced little, if any, measurable results. In fact, I dare suggest that welfare has been the greater of the two boondoggles.
And speaking of color of skin, IMHO, welfare has cause more harm to black people in America than just about anything else, by destroying the black family. Especially when mom doesn't really know who daddy is, which isn't necessarily a black problem, see Anna Nicole Smith's baby for example). However rich Anna's estate could afford the paternity tests necessary to prove paternity, while most poor single black women can't.
It has less to do with brains and more to do with core values. When you define values by the exceptions, then exceptions become the norm, while real values are pushed to the side. Single mothers used to be an exception, now they are the rule. This can't be good for the kids, unless you think that men are irrelevant, almost unnecessary biological holdovers of a paternalist age. And yes, I've heard of men being spoken of exactly that way.
"Pity that S.F. authors seem to go a little nuts when they get old."
It isn't a pity, it is the way of things. A young S.F. can obscure the fact that he is, in fact, nuts by his creativity. The problem with age, is that it tends to bring less creativity and thus unable to hide that which was always there.
1) It will necessarily suck at at least one function 2) It will most likely suck at many 3) It might even suck at all of them 4) If one item gets outdated, the whole thing is
I don't want an all in one. My cell phone camera sucks. My cell phone's MP3 player sucks. My Cell Phone's GPS sucks. They function at such a low level that I don't even use them. This doesn't even count the lousy battery life of the damn thing.
I live in the US. Government was designed to be limited and according to the Constitution, was to provide for the common defense, and promote general welfare. Not the other way around. Very defined, and contrary to what your opinion is.
Besides, what you offered up is nothing more than opinion. Wasting Billions (in your opinion) on the Drug War may not be a "waste" to someone else. So, please define what a "waste" is in broad enough terms to cover anything you deem a "waste" of money.
I'll use your own definition on the very same things you probably support. Go ahead, try it. I dare you.
BTW, I agree that wasting billions on prohibition isn't serving us, because by definition it is costing us more than it serves us. On the other hand, if we made all the illegal vices legal, and taxed the crap out of them we'd have all the money needed to fund all the goofy projects (UHC). The problem with this is "progressives" think that it is "regressive" to have the stupid people pay for their stupidity.
That and it doesn't fit their "stick it to the man" agenda. (which they never realize is sticking it to themselves).
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead. [a man puts a body on the cart] Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one. The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead. The Dead Collector: What? Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead. The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead. Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not. The Dead Collector: He isn't. Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better. Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment. The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart. Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby. The Dead Collector: I can't take him. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine. Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor. The Dead Collector: I can't. Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long. The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today. Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round? The Dead Collector: Thursday. The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk. Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do? The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy. I feel happy. [the Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club] Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much. The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday. Large Man with Dead Body: Right.
Slashdot is a news aggregator true enough. However slashdot, like many blogs, provides a varied set of viewpoints on most subjects(with notable exceptions), and the commentary that follows is almost more informative than the original article or post. Many times experts, not available in the article themselves are here and speak to why something is (or is not) correct, and explain why. Which makes it infinitely more valuable that any of the filtered crap that passes for "news" elsewhere.
There are plenty of first hand experiences available on sites like slashdot (and other news), perspectives that paint a broader picture than the limited view points selected by the reporter / editor of normal news sources.
"The problem with original reporting, it's bloody expensive."
Not really. What is expensive is filtering the information being distributed for public consumption, by a select few pre-approved "reporters". Today, we don't have that model in the "new media". We have distributed reporting where everyone can be a reporter. In fact, I gave the example of YouTube already, as a prime example of universal reporting, raw and unfiltered.
It isn't even about amateur reporting being trust worthy. As professional reporting isn't very trustworthy IMHO either. By gaining lots of viewpoints one can really see the filters people have in place. We all have bias, its a matter of understanding what those bias are.
I'm libertarian, unlike most sheeple who belong to the big government party of the Republicrats.
I didn't say "liberal" or "conservative" anywhere in my post, so while I don't appreciate you trying to speak for me, I understand why you feel you have to. It is because what I said doesn't compute with your (D)=good (R)=bad (or visa versa) point of view.
I'd rather you realize that I have a complex but well structured viewpoint that doesn't lend itself to your narrow labels. Thanks for trying.
"Our biggest problem with the media is consolidation"
That is not a problem, because the Net has already routed around that problem.
The current consolidation of news is ONLY limited to traditional mass media (Paper, broadcast), which is centralized by its own infrastructure anyways; Printing press, Antennas etc.
What you fail to realize or state in your premise, is that these media sources are also collapsing under their own weight, and centralization is a huge contributer of that collapse.
Your viewpoint is almost as archaic as traditional media is. The fact is, everyone is a reporter now, and everyone is a consumer of news. YouTube is the new boiler room of the news organization.
Or CBS (Rathergate) or NBC (Exploding Trucks) or CNN (staged Videos) or....
I'm sorry, but unless you're blind, we shouldn't trust "official" news sources at all. I'd rather listen to NPR (quite liberal) AND Fox because I realize that both are filtered news and often ignore facts that don't fit their viewership's points of view. However, it tends to give me a more complete view of events than either provide by themselves.
It is also why I tend to read Slashdot, because of the varied viewpoints of the intellectually elite geeks found here.
In summary, unless you actually listen to Fox News AND NPR and the others, you're only getting partial and 1/2 truths.
I'm curious if you think Hillary lied when she said she ran from the Helicopter to the waiting SUVs in Bosnia, or if you think that was just an over exaggeration after being caught up in the story telling?
Slashdot Mirror
Who cares?
Just because he's right doesn't mean he's right. He has some facts correct, but the conclusion is all wrong. This is typical of anti iTMS iPod Apple rants such as his.
I also made the comparison with WMA files and not knowing which of the "other" players out there support this format (or not), DRMed or not. WMA player is right up there with OGG players, who cares?
And I CAN buy DRM ACC files, and play them on any other ACC player, because stripping the DRM from the files is fairly painless with the right tools.
Again, the problem isn't DRMed ACC files, it is DRM, period. THIS is the problem, not that there aren't any other players that play DRMed ACC files.
Let stay clear on what the problem really is.
We're not at war with Iraq.
So, I wonder who we're at war with.
What I found funny was my brain was actually translating the grey buttons into slashdot green. Now that I look closer, they are indeed grey. And now all I see is the grey; no more slashdot green.
Gee, thanks alot.
"Name one player besides Apple's that plays iTMS protected AAC."
... with the labels requiring DRM.
I can't tell if you're serious or just stupid. iPods play ACC (DRM or not) and MP3s. They don't play WMA (DRM or not). I don't know of a single player of WMA (DRM or not). I don't doubt that they exist, I'm just saying I don't which one does or doesn't. Mainly I don't care, because who the heck uses WMA (DRM or not)?
There are other players for ACC out there, besides Apple, they just can't play Apple's DRMed version.
So, we're back the least common denominator, MP3. Of which, just about every player will play, including those purchased from Amazon.
And as for Apple's DRM, it is easily circumvented by at least two distinct techniques, one that strips the DRM from the tracks making clear ACC, and one that converts tracks from ACC to CDA back to MP3. I'll admit that is a crappy process, but it exists.
"Apple sells DRM free tracks. But how many people do you know that buy from iTMS that have a DRM free collection?"
Is the point DRM bashing (which I'll agree to) or Apple bashing (which I won't agree to) or User bashing (Maybe I'll agree)?????
I think you're confusing DRM, with Apple with the lUSERs.
"Don't get me wrong. I have an iPod. But I refuse to buy from iTMS"
That's just silly. You're complaint about Apple is really a confusion with DRM. Buy the music you want in DRM free form from where ever it is cheapest for the quality you want. Don't blame Apple for DRM, put the blame where it belongs
Apple sells DRM free tracks, not all tracks are DRM free, but that isn't APPLE's fault, as Apple has clearly stated that DRM free is the way to go. Their hands are tied by the labels.
Not buying from Apple because of DRM is like punching your wife because she told you the neighbor ran your dog over.
Don't you know, Adams was a prophet! That makes the grandparent insightful! Where's your faith man??? 42 is all you need to know.
Except one thing, you didn't write it.
....
That being said, this was a declaration of rebellion, not necessarily for war, although they knew it would lead to war.
BTW, Don't you just love the language in this document? So unambiguous, and eloquent. Everything written today is coded for the ability to morph the meaning when needed. The purpose of government is stated so simply and elegantly
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed"
If we only had a government like that. Sigh.
If you do something, you piss people off. If you do nothing, you piss people off. It is a lose lose proposition if you think we can avoid pissing people off.
Some people don't need an excuse to be pissed off, they are born pissed off.
Can't make everyone happy either, so we shouldn't even try to make "everyone" happy, because it is impossible.
The point is, and I truly believe this, we should be more judicious in deciding who we are "friends" with. I don't have tons of friends, but I have enought to know each and every one of them is willing to die for me (and me for them).
I suggest that we withdraw all of our troops, not just from Iraq, but from around the whole world. If the complaint is American Colonialism/Imperialism (which is the big one), then this should solve the largest complaint. I really doubt the world would like itself without the US keeping the peace, in spite of the Iraq/Afgan wars.
Think of all the wars that would break out if the US wasn't there to keep things more or less peaceful. Israel, Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Korea, Africa.
I realize that it could be argued that the wars that break out would be the fault of the US for not allowing the natural equilibrium (or whatever) to be adjusted over the years, so this ends up being the same "lose lose" proposition I started with.
... or a better algorithm
This is classic XOR thinking that permeates our society. One or the other, not both is rarely a correct option. It is mostly for boolean operations, which this is clearly not. This is clearly an AND function. More Data AND a Better Algorithm is actually the most correct answer. "Which helps more?" is a silly question except for deciding on how much resources should be split in improving both, along with how much easier is one vs the other.
I'm actually more radical, in some ways than you are. I think we should pull our military home. Period. We should be spending all the money used to keep our troops deployed over seas on incentives going towards high tech weapons and defenses.
Let the world know what its like without the US holding things together for a while.
"Much more difficult is to support your argument with appeals to reason, rather than appeals to emotion."
Republicrats and Demicans both use fear as motivation, because it is powerful. From the "Fear the Terrorists" to the "They'll take your social security away" type tactics of both major parties, fear is used to influence people.
Having said that, it is still easier to write effective "anti" pieces than effective "pro" pieces. Which is why it political hit pieces are more popular.
My wish is to have an election where all parties agree to not mention the others once, and run the whole thing on merit propaganda. It would be interesting to say the least.
Lets say you get your all in one unit, and it has acceptable performance across all converged devices. Let just say it also has a camera, and the camera breaks. What do you do? Replace the whole unit, or buy a digital camera to replace the lost functionality?
I tend to buy things and use them till they are all used up. The car I drive is now 12 years old, I bought it new. I'll drive it till it no longer runs. I don't buy new cars every three years. Same with the toaster (six years old), fridge (five years old), washer(3 years), dryer, table saw(ten years), camera (five years), tv (18 years), printers (six years) and phones (cell phone is three).
About the only exception to this list is computers, but even then, I don't buy new top of the line units to start with. I tend to buy middle of the road, and beef up the ram. Currently, I'm waiting for the 32 bit software world to end before my next computer. While Linux and Vista (and XP, sort of) have 64 bit versions, they are haphazard implementations at best (well, linux less so). Why buy a system that can't address more than 3.6 GB Ram? And why buy a 64 bit system that has no 64bit apps?
The problem is that it is much easier to write antiwhatever propaganda than it is to write prowhatever propaganda.
:-D
Really, it is.
Nobody is "pro-war". Well, no reasonable person is. However, there is a time and place for war. So while even I hate war, I also realize that there is a time and place for it. If you are "Anti-war", you can speak against war, generally or specifically, and it is quite easy. And if you speak in general enough terms, I might even agree with much of what you say.
For an exercise in application, try to write a pro-war piece. Most people would have an awful time trying. Now write an Anti-war piece. Just about everyone could.
And no, I'm not making excuses for GWB. In fact, if you want to blame anyone for this, blame congress, who has the power to declare wars and such. And who exactly are we at war with now anyway? It surely isn't the current Government of Iraq, is it?
Seriously!
Well, unlike some people, and probably most geeks, I don't want gadgets hanging from my belt to start, including a phone. I love technology, I love playing with toys, most of these things are nothing more than toys. But I don't play with my toys all day long.
... well a laptop, which was way more functional.
My wife and kids have all these toys, Camaras, iPods. In my life, I've needed a GPS probably once. And who walks around with a GPS every day? Are you that lost?
I hate most PDAs because they tend to change how they work every two years for no appearent reason, other than to change. Just when I figure out how to use it, it changes. Great example is Graffiti's changes between version one, which rocked, and version 2 which sucked so bad I had to get a mini keyboard to be functional, at which point the idea of a PDA became
AND you never addressed obsolescence of one of the many devices. My cell phone has a 1.5 MPIX camera, which doesn't compare with my 10 MPIX one I actually use to take photos. Maybe its just that I've never seen an all-in-one that excels as such. Even multi function printers, which are decent, can't compare to discrete component parts.
I'm glad however that you're satisfied with less than state of the art, all-in-ones that when they break you just buy a new one. I wonder what you do when one of the parts breaks? Do you buy whole new unit or just a new standalone unit of what actually no longer works?
"It's pretty much the definition of waste: using a lot of a resource for no, or insufficient gain."
I'll take that definition, and apply it to the Welfare System and all other social programs. After all these years, the war on Poverty has cost us way more than the war on drugs, and has produced little, if any, measurable results. In fact, I dare suggest that welfare has been the greater of the two boondoggles.
And speaking of color of skin, IMHO, welfare has cause more harm to black people in America than just about anything else, by destroying the black family. Especially when mom doesn't really know who daddy is, which isn't necessarily a black problem, see Anna Nicole Smith's baby for example). However rich Anna's estate could afford the paternity tests necessary to prove paternity, while most poor single black women can't.
It has less to do with brains and more to do with core values. When you define values by the exceptions, then exceptions become the norm, while real values are pushed to the side. Single mothers used to be an exception, now they are the rule. This can't be good for the kids, unless you think that men are irrelevant, almost unnecessary biological holdovers of a paternalist age. And yes, I've heard of men being spoken of exactly that way.
"Pity that S.F. authors seem to go a little nuts when they get old."
It isn't a pity, it is the way of things. A young S.F. can obscure the fact that he is, in fact, nuts by his creativity. The problem with age, is that it tends to bring less creativity and thus unable to hide that which was always there.
Problem with your "one" device are as follows:
1) It will necessarily suck at at least one function
2) It will most likely suck at many
3) It might even suck at all of them
4) If one item gets outdated, the whole thing is
I don't want an all in one. My cell phone camera sucks. My cell phone's MP3 player sucks. My Cell Phone's GPS sucks. They function at such a low level that I don't even use them. This doesn't even count the lousy battery life of the damn thing.
I live in the US. Government was designed to be limited and according to the Constitution, was to provide for the common defense, and promote general welfare. Not the other way around. Very defined, and contrary to what your opinion is.
Besides, what you offered up is nothing more than opinion. Wasting Billions (in your opinion) on the Drug War may not be a "waste" to someone else. So, please define what a "waste" is in broad enough terms to cover anything you deem a "waste" of money.
I'll use your own definition on the very same things you probably support. Go ahead, try it. I dare you.
BTW, I agree that wasting billions on prohibition isn't serving us, because by definition it is costing us more than it serves us. On the other hand, if we made all the illegal vices legal, and taxed the crap out of them we'd have all the money needed to fund all the goofy projects (UHC). The problem with this is "progressives" think that it is "regressive" to have the stupid people pay for their stupidity.
That and it doesn't fit their "stick it to the man" agenda. (which they never realize is sticking it to themselves).
http://www.vgcats.com/comics/extras/stillalive.php
----
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
[a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: What?
Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
The Dead Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round?
The Dead Collector: Thursday.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk.
Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy. I feel happy.
[the Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club]
Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much.
The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
Large Man with Dead Body: Right.
Crap, I hate you. And my apologies to SNL, Chevy Chase and Jane Curtain but here it goes ....
USB you Electronic Slut
Slashdot is a news aggregator true enough. However slashdot, like many blogs, provides a varied set of viewpoints on most subjects(with notable exceptions), and the commentary that follows is almost more informative than the original article or post. Many times experts, not available in the article themselves are here and speak to why something is (or is not) correct, and explain why. Which makes it infinitely more valuable that any of the filtered crap that passes for "news" elsewhere.
There are plenty of first hand experiences available on sites like slashdot (and other news), perspectives that paint a broader picture than the limited view points selected by the reporter / editor of normal news sources.
"The problem with original reporting, it's bloody expensive."
Not really. What is expensive is filtering the information being distributed for public consumption, by a select few pre-approved "reporters". Today, we don't have that model in the "new media". We have distributed reporting where everyone can be a reporter. In fact, I gave the example of YouTube already, as a prime example of universal reporting, raw and unfiltered.
It isn't even about amateur reporting being trust worthy. As professional reporting isn't very trustworthy IMHO either. By gaining lots of viewpoints one can really see the filters people have in place. We all have bias, its a matter of understanding what those bias are.
I'm libertarian, unlike most sheeple who belong to the big government party of the Republicrats.
I didn't say "liberal" or "conservative" anywhere in my post, so while I don't appreciate you trying to speak for me, I understand why you feel you have to. It is because what I said doesn't compute with your (D)=good (R)=bad (or visa versa) point of view.
I'd rather you realize that I have a complex but well structured viewpoint that doesn't lend itself to your narrow labels. Thanks for trying.
"Our biggest problem with the media is consolidation"
That is not a problem, because the Net has already routed around that problem.
The current consolidation of news is ONLY limited to traditional mass media (Paper, broadcast), which is centralized by its own infrastructure anyways; Printing press, Antennas etc.
What you fail to realize or state in your premise, is that these media sources are also collapsing under their own weight, and centralization is a huge contributer of that collapse.
Your viewpoint is almost as archaic as traditional media is. The fact is, everyone is a reporter now, and everyone is a consumer of news. YouTube is the new boiler room of the news organization.
Or CBS (Rathergate) ....
or NBC (Exploding Trucks)
or CNN (staged Videos)
or
I'm sorry, but unless you're blind, we shouldn't trust "official" news sources at all. I'd rather listen to NPR (quite liberal) AND Fox because I realize that both are filtered news and often ignore facts that don't fit their viewership's points of view. However, it tends to give me a more complete view of events than either provide by themselves.
It is also why I tend to read Slashdot, because of the varied viewpoints of the intellectually elite geeks found here.
In summary, unless you actually listen to Fox News AND NPR and the others, you're only getting partial and 1/2 truths.
I'm curious if you think Hillary lied when she said she ran from the Helicopter to the waiting SUVs in Bosnia, or if you think that was just an over exaggeration after being caught up in the story telling?