It's not really a parody. They're providing a real service, akin to Google's service, and it's not done to poke fun at Google, but instead competes with Google. There's really nothing about this that could be considered a parody...
Different things are different. MP3s have advantages over CDs, and vice-versa. Charging the same thing for both shouldn't offend anyone's sensibilities; if you think CDs are better, then buy them. If I prefer the instant gratification and unit-purchasability of MP3s, then I'll buy them instead.
"or you could pay 8.3 cents for me to email you an individual page of text, what would you do?"
You mean radio stations have only been playing what amount to isolated pages of a book?
Your analogy is silly, because each song can stand on its own as a creative work in a way that a page from a book cannot.
A better analogy is if the book were an anthology of short stories, and you could purchase individual short stories. In this case, I would at times enjoy buying individual short stories, either because I particularly like them, or because I want to create my own custom anthology. (mix/burn)
If a dozen eggs cose $1.20, what basis do you have for saying $0.10 is too much to pay for an egg?
If a single song cost less than 1/Nth the cost of an N-track album, then why wouldn't you just download all the songs individually, and save a little money?
I challenge any of the whiners out there to present me with an example where you pay *more* for a set of something than you would buying them seperately.
If you pay $12 (or more) for a 12-track CD, there is no way to say paying $0.99 a track is a rip-off, except for the hardcopy/liner-notes argument, which in my opinion is offset by not having to go to the store or wait days for Amazon.
The only reason the show is going to be 'respun' after Sarah leaves is because she's the title character and a Buffyless Buffy has to be called something else.
Sarah's leaving, it doesn't mean the franchise is closing down, though it's hardly surprising that she'd want to spin it that way.
Me, I'm secretly hoping for a crossover spinoff from Buffy and Enterprise, where a new slayer named Gargravarr rises up in The Fray's post-slayer universe, and travels by starship from world to world to (and this part's key) alphabetically insult, and then slay, every demon in the known universe.
Things get interesting in the series's two-hour pilot (which happens to also be it's season finale) when she crosses paths with, and consequently teams up with, Malcolm Reynolds and crew. The finale (aired in week two) centers around a final confrontation with the Big Bad: the mysterious yet ugly Reavers.
If only TiVo made new shows based on the ones I like...
I think Google is the perfect Pyra buyer because their user-driven mentality is right in line with Evan's mentality. Google Labs is full of cool ideas that three-person Google teams come up with, and the ones that get a lot of user attention and use get funded further and get ramped up for mainstream use. It makes perfect sense to me that Google would be attracted to the best extra-googliar example of this mentality: Blogger, the first large-scale hosted blog application.
Curiosities I have are how Google will deal with it's first for-pay service, and what, if any, value-adds Google will give to Blogger blogs: Higher rankings in search results? Possibly. Live posting into Google's search index? Probably. I'm sure there are ideas that haven't even been thought of yet.
I can't wait to see where this goes! I just wish I was a part of it.
One of the great laws of sciento-marketing is: "As time to release approaches infinity, theoretical efficiency approaches 100%."
Come up with a new theory for solar cells and you can boast that it has the potential for nearly 100% efficiency, but the proof is in the pudding, and we all know how long it's taking thin flexible display pudding to set...
It's nice to know that 3G has a high latency, but I disagree with your opinion that being able to run terminal services means that the latency is less than I claimed.
You're saying that 3G's latency is unacceptable, and that it's over 0.5 seconds (500ms). I'm saying that ricochet had a latencyof over 250ms which, while twice as fast as 3G, and apparently fast enough for terminal services, doesn't mean it's fast enough for other tasks.
Thanks for adding info to the pot, but I think you're a little quick to say that my info's wrong.
Pricing may improve, coverage may expand, but Ricochet will still fail for one simple reason at the core of its architecture: Latency.
I was a Ricochet customer for three years. I had one of their original modems, and one of the 'ISDN-speed' modems, and ping to *any* site was consistantly over 250ms. That might not sound like a lot, but as ping times have come down across the net, more and more applications rely on a low-latency connection. Even looking at a web page requires 4-8 handshaking traverses to initiate, process, and complete the transaction. This amounts to 1-2 seconds, on a good day, on top of transfer time.
It also makes networked games and other 'realtime' interactive applications nearly impossible.
The reason for the latency is simple: Ricochet gets its coverage by deploying arrays of transcievers that do double-duty: They talk to the end-user modems, and they also route date from transciever to transciever until they hit a landlined base station. This relay race usually means a signal has hopped from 1 to 8 transcievers before it even gets to the net, and the return trip is just as bad.
The alternative is wiring up each base station to a DSL or other landline, a topology that places Ricochet in the same realm as, but in between, Wi-Fi and 3G systems. If that's the case, costs will likely be higher than they were before, because each 1/4-mile cell requires its own pipe, and there's no strong difference why Ricochet should succeed, especially when it's playing catch-up in the client hardware deployment game.
No. Look for longer-range add-ons to the 802.11 protocol to fill the gap, if it needs to be filled at all.
I love my TiVo, but I lost faith in its content recommender when it started recording "To Be Announced." (true story)
It also decided for a while that I really wanted to watch Korean love stories and Latino dance parties, but it got over that eventually.
Nowadays I keep my TiVo full enough that it never has room for suggested recordings, except the occasional SCTV or South Park, which is as it should be.
So basically these billboards, without your permission are reading, analyzing, recording, and acting on leaky RF transmissions coming from inside your vehicle?
How is this not illegal eavesdropping? What I listen to is personal information, and using devices specifically created to circumvent the privacy afforded by rolling up my windows seems no different than hooking up a secret tap to my cable box to see what I watch, or looking at my library records to know what I read.
"In short, your attitude is probably at the root of a lot of bugs in today's software. Programmers need to get lazier for software to improve, and, as a bonus, lazily written software will often run faster, too.,/I>"
I think in your composition you forgot my actual point: that code written when the coder has constraints on processing power and memory often perform much better when those constraints are removed, because the coder writes cleaner code.
Though it's not an obvious distinction, this is not the same thing as a coder trying to squeeze every possible optimization into a bloated codebase to get that little bit of extra speed.
The former results in simpler programs that tend to be more elegant and faster for their simplicity. The other results in frgile bloatware that has to be re-engineered to take advantage of every minor enhancement for each chip.
Slashdot Mirror
It's Mitchell Baker...
YANAL.
Profit has nothing to do with trademark infringement.
Someone can rake in the cash on a parody and be legally protected, and someone can infringe on a trademark without making a red cent.
It's not really a parody. They're providing a real service, akin to Google's service, and it's not done to poke fun at Google, but instead competes with Google. There's really nothing about this that could be considered a parody...
Different things are different. MP3s have advantages over CDs, and vice-versa. Charging the same thing for both shouldn't offend anyone's sensibilities; if you think CDs are better, then buy them. If I prefer the instant gratification and unit-purchasability of MP3s, then I'll buy them instead.
No big deal.
"or you could pay 8.3 cents for me to email you an individual page of text, what would you do?"
You mean radio stations have only been playing what amount to isolated pages of a book?
Your analogy is silly, because each song can stand on its own as a creative work in a way that a page from a book cannot.
A better analogy is if the book were an anthology of short stories, and you could purchase individual short stories. In this case, I would at times enjoy buying individual short stories, either because I particularly like them, or because I want to create my own custom anthology. (mix/burn)
If a dozen eggs cose $1.20, what basis do you have for saying $0.10 is too much to pay for an egg?
If a single song cost less than 1/Nth the cost of an N-track album, then why wouldn't you just download all the songs individually, and save a little money?
I challenge any of the whiners out there to present me with an example where you pay *more* for a set of something than you would buying them seperately.
If you pay $12 (or more) for a 12-track CD, there is no way to say paying $0.99 a track is a rip-off, except for the hardcopy/liner-notes argument, which in my opinion is offset by not having to go to the store or wait days for Amazon.
Nevermind. Got it (grumble*rtfp*grumble)
I see the academic pricing, but I find no mention of an $85 student price. Do you have a link?
"After Jim proved the hypotheses, the hypothesis was proven."
You're just lucky I didn't ry to fit The West Wing in there as well...
The only reason the show is going to be 'respun' after Sarah leaves is because she's the title character and a Buffyless Buffy has to be called something else.
Sarah's leaving, it doesn't mean the franchise is closing down, though it's hardly surprising that she'd want to spin it that way.
Me, I'm secretly hoping for a crossover spinoff from Buffy and Enterprise, where a new slayer named Gargravarr rises up in The Fray's post-slayer universe, and travels by starship from world to world to (and this part's key) alphabetically insult, and then slay, every demon in the known universe.
Things get interesting in the series's two-hour pilot (which happens to also be it's season finale) when she crosses paths with, and consequently teams up with, Malcolm Reynolds and crew. The finale (aired in week two) centers around a final confrontation with the Big Bad: the mysterious yet ugly Reavers.
If only TiVo made new shows based on the ones I like...
I consider a posting on slashdot to be an article. I read that article, though I didn't read the referenced article.
You might be a little less capricious in calling people liars.
Olympic pools are 50m
But the article said it's the height of an Olympic swimming pool. Those pools are what, 8 feet deep?
This is a very, very flat plane.
Heh. A plane plane.
Okay, the word has now lost all meaning to me.
Wow. 65 processors and not a single Motorola or IBM chip. And so the megahertz myth marches on, unchallenged...
I think Google is the perfect Pyra buyer because their user-driven mentality is right in line with Evan's mentality. Google Labs is full of cool ideas that three-person Google teams come up with, and the ones that get a lot of user attention and use get funded further and get ramped up for mainstream use. It makes perfect sense to me that Google would be attracted to the best extra-googliar example of this mentality: Blogger, the first large-scale hosted blog application.
Curiosities I have are how Google will deal with it's first for-pay service, and what, if any, value-adds Google will give to Blogger blogs: Higher rankings in search results? Possibly. Live posting into Google's search index? Probably. I'm sure there are ideas that haven't even been thought of yet.
I can't wait to see where this goes! I just wish I was a part of it.
I wish there was a small six-key grid akin to the help/home/pgUp/del/end/pgDn cluster that had:
< / >
@ . "
I would use that every minute of every day.
"Welcome to Bandini Montain!"
"Bandini is the word for... fertilizer."
Come up with a new theory for solar cells and you can boast that it has the potential for nearly 100% efficiency, but the proof is in the pudding, and we all know how long it's taking thin flexible display pudding to set...
Does anyone know if Apple or a third party plans to offer a PC Card with DVI support?
Irrelevant. The 12" TiBook doesn't have a PC card slot either.
It's nice to know that 3G has a high latency, but I disagree with your opinion that being able to run terminal services means that the latency is less than I claimed.
You're saying that 3G's latency is unacceptable, and that it's over 0.5 seconds (500ms). I'm saying that ricochet had a latencyof over 250ms which, while twice as fast as 3G, and apparently fast enough for terminal services, doesn't mean it's fast enough for other tasks.
Thanks for adding info to the pot, but I think you're a little quick to say that my info's wrong.
Pricing may improve, coverage may expand, but Ricochet will still fail for one simple reason at the core of its architecture: Latency.
I was a Ricochet customer for three years. I had one of their original modems, and one of the 'ISDN-speed' modems, and ping to *any* site was consistantly over 250ms. That might not sound like a lot, but as ping times have come down across the net, more and more applications rely on a low-latency connection. Even looking at a web page requires 4-8 handshaking traverses to initiate, process, and complete the transaction. This amounts to 1-2 seconds, on a good day, on top of transfer time.
It also makes networked games and other 'realtime' interactive applications nearly impossible.
The reason for the latency is simple: Ricochet gets its coverage by deploying arrays of transcievers that do double-duty: They talk to the end-user modems, and they also route date from transciever to transciever until they hit a landlined base station. This relay race usually means a signal has hopped from 1 to 8 transcievers before it even gets to the net, and the return trip is just as bad.
The alternative is wiring up each base station to a DSL or other landline, a topology that places Ricochet in the same realm as, but in between, Wi-Fi and 3G systems. If that's the case, costs will likely be higher than they were before, because each 1/4-mile cell requires its own pipe, and there's no strong difference why Ricochet should succeed, especially when it's playing catch-up in the client hardware deployment game.
No. Look for longer-range add-ons to the 802.11 protocol to fill the gap, if it needs to be filled at all.
Clealy the goatse guy is highly accessable. That's what makes it so scary!
I love my TiVo, but I lost faith in its content recommender when it started recording "To Be Announced." (true story)
It also decided for a while that I really wanted to watch Korean love stories and Latino dance parties, but it got over that eventually.
Nowadays I keep my TiVo full enough that it never has room for suggested recordings, except the occasional SCTV or South Park, which is as it should be.
So basically these billboards, without your permission are reading, analyzing, recording, and acting on leaky RF transmissions coming from inside your vehicle?
How is this not illegal eavesdropping? What I listen to is personal information, and using devices specifically created to circumvent the privacy afforded by rolling up my windows seems no different than hooking up a secret tap to my cable box to see what I watch, or looking at my library records to know what I read.
"In short, your attitude is probably at the root of a lot of bugs in today's software. Programmers need to get lazier for software to improve, and, as a bonus, lazily written software will often run faster, too.,/I>"
I think in your composition you forgot my actual point: that code written when the coder has constraints on processing power and memory often perform much better when those constraints are removed, because the coder writes cleaner code.
Though it's not an obvious distinction, this is not the same thing as a coder trying to squeeze every possible optimization into a bloated codebase to get that little bit of extra speed.
The former results in simpler programs that tend to be more elegant and faster for their simplicity. The other results in frgile bloatware that has to be re-engineered to take advantage of every minor enhancement for each chip.