I am not aware of any disproof of that theory. I suspect that one reason "management" fires aren't set is threefold: a) there's nobody available to keep an eye on them (at least, nobody whose time isn't already budgeted) b) if an accidental fire gets big, it's "shit happens". If a deliberate fire gets out of control, it's a lawsuit magnet. c) even if no deliberate fire gets out of control, the possibility is political ammo.
As I understand it much of the hate for scalpers goes like this:
Band puts on show band wants show to be accessible to their biggest fans, who are frequently the ones with spare time, which frequently means the ones without as much money, i.e. teenagers scalpers grab all the tickets, teenager fans can't afford them also, seats scalpers can't sell become empty seats (not unprofitable seats, they did get sold, but the band'll be less chuffed than a full house would provide) so the band is less than happy two ways, which makes fans of the band unhappy. And almost everyone's a fan of some band.
One solution is to keep putting on shows as long as the tickets sell out, thereby increasing supply (theoretically) to the point that the scalper can't make enough profit to bother. But that's not always an option, due to pre-scheduling of both the band and the venue.
There's also some "why should that guy get to gouge other people for tickets because his computer was faster at buying them out? what's so great about him?" resentment.
Amazon's guidelines (currently) specify that for an item to be called "new" the original manufacturer's warranty should still be applicable. Otherwise, the best option is "Used - like new". I had not realized this before; my understanding was pretty much "new = still in shrinkwrap" and there was no warranty (after all, the verbiage "no warranty expressed or implied, including fitness for purpose" is pretty standard). I suppose the warranty is that if the disk is physically damaged you can get a replacement. *shrug*
whups, I overlooked that this is an EU thing, not a USA thing. I have no real knowledge of how the EU thinks about fair use; it may not be applicable at all.
no clear permission, true. But might be fair use, depending. Unfortunately there are no guildelines saying "this is fair use", there are only court cases where fair use was successfully asserted.
Then the dingaling for New Guy Cable is gonna get sued, and almost certainly lose, and New Guy Cable is going to pay (unless the dingaling was really stupid with his contract) and fire the dingaling, thus eliminating one incompetent contractor.
except that they don't want to eat you (a one-time benefit) they want to milk you month after month, so the analogy breaks down pretty quickly.
Let's try a car analogy. You gotta buy gas, but you get to choose which station to use of the ones near by. The more stations are in the area, the more they have to avoid pissing you off to get your business.
"It is now easier to stream music than to pirate it"
I'm sure, some of the drop really is due to legitimate alternatives appearing. Yet, those alternatives still cost some money, so the criminal and civil prosecutions of the illegal downloaders and download-facilitators must've helped too.
Must it? Do you have evidence?
How much of the observed drop is due to those, law-based measures?
An excellent question. Do you have an answer? Since the next question kind of depends on the answer to this one.
We're also, I presume, assuming that the streaming services don't exist? Because I'm pretty much okay with Spotify's free service. (I used to use the paid service but I stopped commuting as much and decided it wasn't worth it for the reduced usage.)
If spotify and pirating were both non-viable I'd be listening to the radio, so I guess it would be "not have a music collection".
yeah, but not guilty of perjury. And you have to prove knowing misrepresentation, which is on the same level of difficult as proving a lack of good faith belief - essentially, if you don't have an email where they say "mwahahaha, I'm going to file a bogus takedown request" they can just claim stupidity.
it's a spot where the screen area is intruded on by non-screen stuff. The most famous, I think, if not the first was the apple iphone X, which has a notch in the top of the display area to hold the selfie camera and probably some other stuff. App developers have to know about it so they don't try to use pixels that aren't there for anything important, so it's effectively a feature they have to support.
The short form, I think, comes out to "we used somewhat complicated math to handle several things independently, but this even more complicated math handles it all together, which may help us predict more stuff."
Fair point. Unjustified reverence for computer output has been common for long enough that I assumed that to be the case and did not consider that they might think it could be wrong but it's not worth the effort to disagree.
I've been playing a lot of Fallout 4 lately and I can state that quick action with a tricked out shotgun can usually prevent the nuke from getting used.
from the summary, it sounds like the concern is that it's being treated like an infallible oracle. It may not have come up with a significant false positive yet, but there's no way to tell if it's had false negatives, and unlike human advisors it's probably not very good at explaining why it came to a given conclusion (unless you're willing to trace the code while it processes something).
Slashdot Mirror
I am not aware of any disproof of that theory. I suspect that one reason "management" fires aren't set is threefold:
a) there's nobody available to keep an eye on them (at least, nobody whose time isn't already budgeted)
b) if an accidental fire gets big, it's "shit happens". If a deliberate fire gets out of control, it's a lawsuit magnet.
c) even if no deliberate fire gets out of control, the possibility is political ammo.
As I understand it much of the hate for scalpers goes like this:
Band puts on show
band wants show to be accessible to their biggest fans, who are frequently the ones with spare time, which frequently means the ones without as much money, i.e. teenagers
scalpers grab all the tickets, teenager fans can't afford them
also, seats scalpers can't sell become empty seats (not unprofitable seats, they did get sold, but the band'll be less chuffed than a full house would provide)
so the band is less than happy two ways, which makes fans of the band unhappy. And almost everyone's a fan of some band.
One solution is to keep putting on shows as long as the tickets sell out, thereby increasing supply (theoretically) to the point that the scalper can't make enough profit to bother. But that's not always an option, due to pre-scheduling of both the band and the venue.
There's also some "why should that guy get to gouge other people for tickets because his computer was faster at buying them out? what's so great about him?" resentment.
Amazon's guidelines (currently) specify that for an item to be called "new" the original manufacturer's warranty should still be applicable. Otherwise, the best option is "Used - like new". I had not realized this before; my understanding was pretty much "new = still in shrinkwrap" and there was no warranty (after all, the verbiage "no warranty expressed or implied, including fitness for purpose" is pretty standard). I suppose the warranty is that if the disk is physically damaged you can get a replacement. *shrug*
He seemed to me to be dissing stupid developers who assume that if the field isn't named "password" then it doesn't matter if it's exposed.
whups, I overlooked that this is an EU thing, not a USA thing. I have no real knowledge of how the EU thinks about fair use; it may not be applicable at all.
no clear permission, true. But might be fair use, depending. Unfortunately there are no guildelines saying "this is fair use", there are only court cases where fair use was successfully asserted.
Then the dingaling for New Guy Cable is gonna get sued, and almost certainly lose, and New Guy Cable is going to pay (unless the dingaling was really stupid with his contract) and fire the dingaling, thus eliminating one incompetent contractor.
except that they don't want to eat you (a one-time benefit) they want to milk you month after month, so the analogy breaks down pretty quickly.
Let's try a car analogy. You gotta buy gas, but you get to choose which station to use of the ones near by. The more stations are in the area, the more they have to avoid pissing you off to get your business.
I'm sure, some of the drop really is due to legitimate alternatives appearing. Yet, those alternatives still cost some money, so the criminal and civil prosecutions of the illegal downloaders and download-facilitators must've helped too.
Must it? Do you have evidence?
How much of the observed drop is due to those, law-based measures?
An excellent question. Do you have an answer? Since the next question kind of depends on the answer to this one.
We're also, I presume, assuming that the streaming services don't exist? Because I'm pretty much okay with Spotify's free service. (I used to use the paid service but I stopped commuting as much and decided it wasn't worth it for the reduced usage.)
If spotify and pirating were both non-viable I'd be listening to the radio, so I guess it would be "not have a music collection".
Linux is just a game.
I was made for linuxing you baby, you were made for linuxing me...
yeah, but not guilty of perjury. And you have to prove knowing misrepresentation, which is on the same level of difficult as proving a lack of good faith belief - essentially, if you don't have an email where they say "mwahahaha, I'm going to file a bogus takedown request" they can just claim stupidity.
very small scale strip mine, but yep, they did.
it's a spot where the screen area is intruded on by non-screen stuff. The most famous, I think, if not the first was the apple iphone X, which has a notch in the top of the display area to hold the selfie camera and probably some other stuff. App developers have to know about it so they don't try to use pixels that aren't there for anything important, so it's effectively a feature they have to support.
I think we could live with 384 days. But do we still do 5 workdays per 8 day week, or do we still have only 2 day weekends?
The short form, I think, comes out to "we used somewhat complicated math to handle several things independently, but this even more complicated math handles it all together, which may help us predict more stuff."
I apologize; I was unclear. By "they" I meant the rightsholders. Netflix would love to have a bigger catalog, I'm sure.
they _could_ put them all on netflix. They haven't, because they still think they can extract more money in other ways.
yeah, but google doesn't send me messages for non-login related activities.
Fair point. Unjustified reverence for computer output has been common for long enough that I assumed that to be the case and did not consider that they might think it could be wrong but it's not worth the effort to disagree.
I've been playing a lot of Fallout 4 lately and I can state that quick action with a tricked out shotgun can usually prevent the nuke from getting used.
from the summary, it sounds like the concern is that it's being treated like an infallible oracle. It may not have come up with a significant false positive yet, but there's no way to tell if it's had false negatives, and unlike human advisors it's probably not very good at explaining why it came to a given conclusion (unless you're willing to trace the code while it processes something).
On the other hand, "sometimes up to" is not anything like "averages"...
yeah, he is. "Ground duties" does not include air time.
what mechanism of a warming climate increases volcanic activity?