Libraries pay for those archives. You pay for the libraries with your tax dollars.
Your question should be, "Why should I pay for these services twice?"
And the answer is, you can choose to pay the source directly, or you can pay for it indirectly and put up with the inconvenience of having to go to your library and work with microfiche rather than surfing their website from the comfort of your own home. If that's worthwhile to you, then paying might be in your interest.
For most people, I suspect that it's not. I think we'll be seeing a lot of people copy-pasting the entire content of an article to their blogs in order to preserve it for purposes of personal use, review, criticism, and discussion. And then we'll see a slew of copyright lawsuits to try to quash these exercises of fair use.
The ideal solution, to my mind, would be if you could log into the NYT site from home using credentials supplied by your local public library. People without access to libraries but who do have access to the internet could still pay, or get the fresh content for free and save a copy to their local system for any "fair use" needs.
Of course, if the NYT is really only going to archive back a single year with their online content, they'll hardly continue to remain the "newspaper of record" that they've been since forever.
One thing I can tell you is that in Australia getting some guy to fix your XP box will cost about $35/hr whereas a really hopeless Linux administrator will cost about $75.
Why do you think techs love Linux so much, if not for this reason alone? Makes your life easier through lack of licensing encumberance, AND diverts budget from Microsoft to Payroll. How can we not love it?
This pattern is real, but it exists not because would-be Mac owners are stand-offish about parting with money, but because PC prices have dropped, and dropped faster than Mac prices.
The problem, of course, is that people look at the cost of the hardware alone, and not the cost of the OS, upgrades, and applications and the value of the security and usability advantages provided by Apple. Windows piracy (and Windows applications piracy) probably hurts Apple more than it hurts Microsoft.
That's what they get for putting the datacenter colo facility right friggin next to the original site. That whole thing was really poorly managed -- their server is STILL not back online, like 4 years later.
The instructions to the computer may well be human-readable, but they don't necessarily explain the WHY of the instructions. Sometimes a little meta-information can provide necessary background.
If you don't believe me, consider the following two sets of non-computer instructions, one commented and one not:
Without comments:
Move two steps to the right.
With comments:
#You are standing on railroad tracks, and a train is coming.
Move two steps to the right.
You might think the first instruction is not all that important, and might well ignore it. If you've got the comment, you'll know better than to take that line out!
What's so exciting about an OS? Isn't it the apps that we really care about? As long as the OS is secure, doesn't crash, and runs what I want it to run well on the hardware I choose to run it on, isn't that what counts?
(And tack on "and is open source" as well for the perhaps 3% of the world who really understands why that matters...?)
If they can't ramp up hardware any more, the next revolution in computing will not be faster hardware, it will be cleaner, more efficient code. Personally, I think that there's a lot of potential left, if not with silicon, then with diamond wafer chips, or optical computing.
Jury rig is something a mafia don on trial gets away with.
Jerry rig comes to us from World War II. The Germans were known amongst the allies, ever quick and able with a good racial nickname, as "Jerry". Toward the end of the war, with German industrial productivity crushed and little supplies available, the Germans had to improvise with scraps of whatever they could scrounge. Somehow, mostly by sheer guts, they managed to keep on fighting with their jerry-rigged junk.
I wonder how long until some enterprising RAM vendor partners with Microsoft and markets "Beta" RAM. Stable enough for your enterprise's production environment, yet rushed to market so fast that they couldn't waste time with such petty concerns as "testing". Wheee!
No, the point of it is, what is the value of so many of those processes, which serve only to protect against the myriad horrible security vulnerabilities that are inherent to Windows?
Consider the second core with all those anti-malware apps running on them to be "protection money" that you spent to run whatever programs you actually wanted to do stuff with. Is it really justifiable to spend money on a proprietary OS for the privilege of opening yourself to all those attacks just so you can get a little work and living done?
Slashdot Mirror
Libraries pay for those archives. You pay for the libraries with your tax dollars.
Your question should be, "Why should I pay for these services twice?"
And the answer is, you can choose to pay the source directly, or you can pay for it indirectly and put up with the inconvenience of having to go to your library and work with microfiche rather than surfing their website from the comfort of your own home. If that's worthwhile to you, then paying might be in your interest.
For most people, I suspect that it's not. I think we'll be seeing a lot of people copy-pasting the entire content of an article to their blogs in order to preserve it for purposes of personal use, review, criticism, and discussion. And then we'll see a slew of copyright lawsuits to try to quash these exercises of fair use.
The ideal solution, to my mind, would be if you could log into the NYT site from home using credentials supplied by your local public library. People without access to libraries but who do have access to the internet could still pay, or get the fresh content for free and save a copy to their local system for any "fair use" needs.
Of course, if the NYT is really only going to archive back a single year with their online content, they'll hardly continue to remain the "newspaper of record" that they've been since forever.
So is that "high speed" or "full speed"?
Oh wait, that's that Uther Stupid Bus...
One thing I can tell you is that in Australia getting some guy to fix your XP box will cost about $35/hr whereas a really hopeless Linux administrator will cost about $75.
Why do you think techs love Linux so much, if not for this reason alone? Makes your life easier through lack of licensing encumberance, AND diverts budget from Microsoft to Payroll. How can we not love it?
And LucasArts.
Seems like they've lost a little enthusiasm, and gained a little taste. Leave the !s to the Yahoos of the world.
This pattern is real, but it exists not because would-be Mac owners are stand-offish about parting with money, but because PC prices have dropped, and dropped faster than Mac prices.
The problem, of course, is that people look at the cost of the hardware alone, and not the cost of the OS, upgrades, and applications and the value of the security and usability advantages provided by Apple. Windows piracy (and Windows applications piracy) probably hurts Apple more than it hurts Microsoft.
Someone needs to send a team of Troubleshooters over to see what's up with this Burnett guy.
That's what they get for putting the datacenter colo facility right friggin next to the original site. That whole thing was really poorly managed -- their server is STILL not back online, like 4 years later.
If you don't believe me, consider the following two sets of non-computer instructions, one commented and one not:
Without comments:
With comments:
You might think the first instruction is not all that important, and might well ignore it. If you've got the comment, you'll know better than to take that line out!
Nothing beats the sheer bandwidth of a 767 filled with dual-layer DVDs sent hurtling at some destination.
That's how they slashdotted the WTC back in '01.
What's so exciting about an OS? Isn't it the apps that we really care about? As long as the OS is secure, doesn't crash, and runs what I want it to run well on the hardware I choose to run it on, isn't that what counts?
(And tack on "and is open source" as well for the perhaps 3% of the world who really understands why that matters...?)
Will the new George Lucas shoot first still? Or will he dodge and return fire?
I thought Windows already WAS a black box?
If the black box in invulnerable to the crash, why don't they make the whole computer out of the same stuff?
Wow, if just the model is 360m long, imagine how big an ACTUAL nanotube must be!
Yeah, and if it weren't for all those destroyed/lost copies, the surviving copies wouldn't be rare and thus wouldn't be worth anything either.
If they can't ramp up hardware any more, the next revolution in computing will not be faster hardware, it will be cleaner, more efficient code. Personally, I think that there's a lot of potential left, if not with silicon, then with diamond wafer chips, or optical computing.
It's a common corruption of the term. GIs weren't always known for their spelling prowess.
Incidently, Google returns 173,000 hits for "jerry rig", while coming up with only 109,000 for "jury rig".
Jury rig is something a mafia don on trial gets away with.
Jerry rig comes to us from World War II. The Germans were known amongst the allies, ever quick and able with a good racial nickname, as "Jerry". Toward the end of the war, with German industrial productivity crushed and little supplies available, the Germans had to improvise with scraps of whatever they could scrounge. Somehow, mostly by sheer guts, they managed to keep on fighting with their jerry-rigged junk.
They'd be calling it MicroMedia, or Macrosoft. That IS scary. Thanks for saving us from that fate, Adobe!
I can sell you not just a bridge, but an entire 192-port router!
I wonder how long until some enterprising RAM vendor partners with Microsoft and markets "Beta" RAM. Stable enough for your enterprise's production environment, yet rushed to market so fast that they couldn't waste time with such petty concerns as "testing". Wheee!
Like that time the car company decided to build a line of automobiles designed by Homer J. Simpson. Yeah, that worked.
Nah, Microsoft has been shipping and charging for beta software since at least 1981. This isn't news, it's not even a change in policy.
No, the point of it is, what is the value of so many of those processes, which serve only to protect against the myriad horrible security vulnerabilities that are inherent to Windows?
Consider the second core with all those anti-malware apps running on them to be "protection money" that you spent to run whatever programs you actually wanted to do stuff with. Is it really justifiable to spend money on a proprietary OS for the privilege of opening yourself to all those attacks just so you can get a little work and living done?
Moreover, there is no reason to believe that operation
should not extend all the way down to absolute zero.
Um, doesn't everything stop at absolute zero, which is an unattainable and theoretical temperature to begin with?