A restaurant or bar, tho...is a private establishment. It is owned and run by a private citizen....and they should have the say whether they allow smoking, or chewing tobacco or what ever there as long as it is a legal activity. You have the choice to patronize or work there...no one forces you to go there and there is no reason you ever HAVE to go in there other than free choice. I'm sure the person who makes deliveries, or provides other needed services to the business, would disagree with you. These people don't get much say in the matter; the smoke filled restaurant is on their route and they have to go into it. Or are you going to tell them they don't have the right to a safe work environment and that they should all quit their jobs?
As a society we have recognized that providing a safe working environment is in the bests interests of everyone. To accomplish this, there are numerous work and public safety standards mandated by the government that all appropriately licensed "private establishments" must follow. This includes the careful handling, or elimination, of harmful substances in the workplace.
Second hand smoke, a proven carcinogen, is yet another harmful substance that is now finally being regulated.
I'd rather have Steam ask for permission than be forced to root around for the game disc. That's my favorite thing about Steam - not having to have the CD/DVD in the drive. Actually, Steam isn't asking for your permission. You're asking Steam for their permission... to use a product you legally paid for. Big difference. But still, despite them treating you like a common criminal for using your legally purchased product, you like to use Steam for the convenience.
Plus the ads are annoying (pop-ups? seriously?), and the games are priced at RETAIL prices. Hmm, I could spend the same amount of money and get the boxed version with manual at a store, or waste quite a few hours downloading a multi-gig title.... Or do you?
Not only are the games priced at retail, you have to spend hours downloading a multi-gig title while getting subjected to annoying pop-up ads. Then you also need *their* permission to run your software when you want to; it's just too bad if they put out an update to "Insert Popular Game Here" thats slammed their authentication servers, you can just wait.
It's even worse if you buy the box retail, they *still* make you ask for permission to use what you legally purchased.
With all the negative complaints about Steam outlined in your post, why are you using it again? That's right, the major undertaking of having to "root around" for a game disc.
Is using Steam worth all the trouble and headaches you mentioned in your post just because you want to avoid the relatively minor inconvenience of popping a game disc into your computer?
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Ford for permission to take their cars out for groceries.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Chapters for permission to read their books.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling HMV for permission to listen their CDs.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Wal-Mart for permission to watch their DVDs.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling The Brick for permission to sit on their couch.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling EB Games for permission to play an XBox 360 game.
I don't have to beg for permission to do any of the things on the right. With Steam, I do; even when I have the install disc! I don't think that is "very nice".
There is a barrier that I have to erect, as I don't want people to ever think the wrong thing. Why? Because of the reason you said, Guilty first, innocent later. I know exactly what you're talking about. In high school I wanted to be a grade school teacher.
Unfortunately, people automatically assume the worst when a man wants to work with kids; I was strongly advised by my teachers and guidance counsellors to change my mind. I did.
Looking back on it I'm still somewhat sad about it, but at the same time I'm glad about it to. With the current climate I would have lived in constant fear of the kid who got a bad grade, couldn't take it, and them making a false accusation to get back at me. Guilty first, innocent later.
Maybe in the new virtual worlds there'll be something good on TV. I doubt it. Instead I can practically guarantee you will get to see people having sex with Unicorns, and photo-realistic flying penises.
Bush is not up for reelection, but I wouldn't expect you to know that. George W. Bush is obviously not up for re-election; that doesn't stop his brother Jeb from trying in 2012.
This means that if you are the guy driving 55 mph when everyone else is doing 80, you are the one driving recklessly. Sorry to burst your bubble but if the posted limit is 55 and I am doing 55, blasting by me at 25 over the posted limit makes you reckless.
We could argue about the road conditions, the rated speed of the road, or your perception that you're a good driver; none of that matters. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and the posted speed is the posted speed. Don't want to follow the rules of the road as posted? Then don't drive.
I'm not in any way saying you can't exceed the speed limit in an emergency situation. However if you're consistently speeding in defiance of the posted limit, thereby putting law abiding citizens at risk, you deserve the ticket you're going to get.
From a sexual point of view, most women are still part conditioned and part pre-programmed to want male ahem companionship. I think most married men would disagree with that statement.
By the way, have you had the chance to check out the "British Library Special Engineer Force" yet? They're doing amazing, groundbreaking work on human sized paper airplane technology.
I seriously doubt the "classic" hard-drive is going away anytime soon. They're small, tend to be reliable and allow an insanely high number of read/write cycles. I still have drives from 10+ years ago that work just fine (albeit they're a bit small now and don't do much beyond temp storage anymore).
Flash is getting better, but it still allows comparatively much fewer read/write cycles and while they're good for situations requiring limited power needs (lapstops, etc...) they'll need to be replaced more often.
I also doubt that things like flash are going to replace the optical formats for any foreseeable future. A plastic layered disc with a bit of pitted aluminum on it can be manufactured for a price far cheaper than a complex flash based memory storage device. There is a reason I pay less than a buck per disc in a spindle of blank 4.7 GB DVDs and 25-50 bucks for the equivalent 4.7 GB flash memory stick. Media companies are well aware of this too. Right now it's sweet for them, with the economies of scale, they can produce DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, etc... discs for practically nothing and charge the consumer 10 to 40 times the manufacturing costs.
I do agree with you though on the size of the hard-drives. They're getting larger every year, but the portable storage/backup media (blank DVDs) has remained pretty much the same size. I can't wait for this whole format war to die down so the next-gen PC drives become cheaper, I desperately need to backup my 500 GB video editing drive and I don't relish the idea of spanning it over 107 DVD blanks when 10 Blu-Ray or 16 HD-DVD discs would do.
I'm not talking about the 20 year old who has sex with a 15 or 16 year old. I'm talking about the adult who rapes a minor. In a lot of places those over 18 are considered adults; a 15 or 16 year old *is* a minor.
Under your reasoning, why does this particular adult/minor relationship get a pass where greater age differences won't? Both situations involve sex between adults and minors.
Perhaps, as some of the more conservative members of society suggest we do, we should take a lesson from history. It has only been a recent development, the last 125 years or so, that we have increasingly treated our "young adults" as over sized children. In times past, these 15 or 16 year old "minors" would get married and start families, more or less living their lives as any other "adult" would.
Maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with "sex offenders" in our society if we (parents and society in general) stopped treating post pubescent physically mature teenagers like they're five year old children. Instead we should treat them like the young adults they are, recognize this in law, and make them responsible for their actions.
Then we could save the "sex offender" label for those it really should be applied to, people who have sexual contact with pre-pubescent children.
It seems like the majority of people here want to completely obliterate the business of recorded+sold music.
It's not so much the idea of obliterating the business of recorded and sold music that people are talking about. It's the idea of obliterating the business of recorded and sold music by a few high powered cartels designed to keep anyone not approved by them of recording and selling music easily.
I downloaded the sixteen tracks on your main-page. Had you not included your website (which is something I wish more musicians on Slashdot would do when they state "I am a musician") I *never* would have heard of your music. Your stuff is pretty good, put it on a CD and I'll give you $10.00 - $15.00 for it, no problem. For some ideas on selling your own CD's, check out http://www.cdbaby.com/ sure there's more online independent music sellers out there, but it's my favourite.;-)
With "big labels" in control of the media exposure channels, it's nearly impossible for good "niche" musicians to get the word out there. You can't take your stuff to your local radio station as they are filled with and are only allowed to play label approved music. Go the next town over, you'll hear pretty much the same.
Even with Canadian content legislation, unless you're signed by a "big label" you're not going to get any air-play.
That's why most people are saying one of the things new musicians should do is give their stuff away for free and when they have built up enough of a following, go touring and charge for concerts. It's about the only way you're going to get any kind of mass exposure while making money, that could even come close to competing with the kinds of marketing campaigns put out by the labels.
And by all means when you're giving away low quality copies of the album, sell your CD online, or hang around after a show and sell autographed copies of it. People will and do pay if they like a persons stuff and its priced reasonably.
Pete...
PS: I'm really liking the relaxed Jazzy feel on Small Whim.;-)
So as long as that doesn't change to accommodate companies looking for free labor, I see no problem what so ever at all.
We live in a society where large monied interests can purchase a law for a few paltry campaign dollars. You honestly don't think that if forced volunteering for Welfare were to be instituted, companies wouldn't lobby to have those rules and guidelines changed to suit their needs?
We would also run the risk of established charities abusing this. Think of the guy who goes and volunteers for "Meals on Wheels", the "Red Cross", or any other charity. He goes to "work" every day, he fulfills the volunteer requirement and we keep paying him his Welfare.
From his point of view, his mortgage is paid, he has food on the table and he worked hard all day. He now has a job.
Sure, the taxpayers are footing the bill and the charity is getting a free worker, so where's the incentive to get off the system?
You could probably solve a significant amount of problems with welfare if you just required a minimum amount of community service hours in order to get it.
Until corporations start up "charity and volunteer based subsidiaries" to take advantage of the "free" Welfare paid workforce.
No, life isn't black or white. I never said it was.
I also never said I had a problem supporting people and/or companies who make products I like. Whether they work for a soulless corporation, or are independent, if I like a person's work and/or product I will legally purchase it, used or new. Although I think it would be tough to buy used DVD-R's.;-)
Still, I think we both could agree; when you buy used, *someone* made the initial purchase. When you purchase that used product, you are compensating the original purchaser for a portion of the original sale.
For example:
* I buy a CD for 20.00 and sell it to you later for 10.00. * You give me 10.00 bucks up front with the understanding that I would buy the CD, listen to for a few weeks, then give it to you.
In both cases you are contributing money towards something you have stated you did not wish to give money to.
I will grant that you aren't giving them any extra funds, as you would if you bought new. That's not the issue I have. I agree with your stance and buy a lot of used CD's/DVD's (usually out of print, hard to find stuff).
I didn't mean to start an argument, I just wanted to point out the logical fallacy commonly expressed here on Slashdot that somehow buying a used product from a company you hate is somehow sticking it to them. If you really wanted to stick it to them, you wouldn't buy it at all.
Before you ask, yes I have walked the walk. There a quite a few albums that I have *not* purchased, used or new, because they contain DRM on them. I have made the choice not to support artists and/or studios who seek to deny my fair use rights to put my legally purchased music on my iPod.
The same thing that happens to people who don't own cell phones. Or people who turn them off when they go out so people won't disturb them with stupid "Dude! I called your house and got your machine. Where are you?!" calls.
Unless the person or store you're buying the used CD from originally stole it, the "jerks" have already been paid for it.
Don't fool yourself into feeling all mighty and superior for sticking it to the "jerks" by not buying their stuff new. Eventually you are still buying it. It really doesn't matter whether you buy it new (giving you money to the store) or used (giving your money to the person who gave the store their money), you can't escape the fact that you're giving money to "jerks".
If you truly want to hit the "jerks", look at buying from the independents. I do a fair bit of my music shopping over at http://www.cdbaby.com/ which contains a lot of independent musicians hawking their wares for decent prices. You also get the album artwork and the music on a nice pressed CD (great for archive purposes), although sometimes I'll get one that's obviously from a CD burner.
Do I buy stuff from the "jerks" too? Sure, if I like the music, I support the artist; even if they *were* stupid enough to sign one of the "bend over and take it" contracts the labels like to have bands sign. They might not get much, but at least they get some of my money.
Then again, I could imagine it would be a reasonable compromise for Valve to check you actually played the game for an extended period of time in Russia before you legitimately moved to the US.
I have a store bought copy of the Half Life 1: Anthology disc. I've never been able to use it. Nowhere on the box did it say, "Requires Steam to be run." So you can imagine my surprise when I tried to install the game and it tried to install Steam instead. I PURCHASED the fracking thing; I have the shiny pressed disc in my hands. Yet they have the audacity to tell me that I need *THEIR* permission to play it whenever I want to.
I tried to take it back to store, but like most places they would only do exchanges on opened software.
So now I'm stuck with this game I have never played and can't return. In effect, Valve has stolen my money while at the same time treating me like a criminal for purchasing their product.
It doesn't matter where I bought it, or what I paid for it. If I exchange my money with a company for one of their products, I own that product and have the right to use it as I deem fit. I should never need to ask for permission from the company every single time I want to use the product I have paid for.
I don't call Mercedes for permission to take my Smart out for groceries, I will not call Valve for permission every time I want to play my legally purchased game.
Charging the customer for better service is a perfectly acceptable way to handle getting more money, both the cable and phone companies do it.
You are right about this. The airline doing this has nothing to do with net neutrality. This would be like the difference between someone wanting Dial Up and High-Speed Ultra. You pay extra for the better service.
For this to be anti-neutrality, the airport you checked in at would charge you a fee when you checked your luggage in, while the airport you land at would charge a fee to get your luggage back right away, or they would hold it for 48 hours.
The thing is, I see a *huge* problem with having people pay to get their luggage off first. In order for it make the kind of extra cash the CEO is talking about, it'll need to be priced cheaply enough that a significant number of passengers pay the fee.
When they pay the fee, most people are going to assume their particular baggage will be first down the chute. What happens when 40%/50% of the flight pays the fee? They've all paid to have their luggage taken off "first", yet they get to the baggage claim area and rather than just grabbing and going like they expect, they're *still* standing around waiting because it's physically impossible to get all that luggage off "first".
I know I'd be pissed off at having to wait when I've been told I'll have priority baggage handling. What are they going to do, park the baggage truck inside the terminal and just have people who paid the fee take their luggage directly from that?
This is probably off topic, but you might be interested in the "Neanderthal Trilogy" by Robert J. Sawyer http://www.sfwriter.com/exho.htm
In it, he describes a parallel universe where the Neanderthal, not Humans, got the leg up on evolution with the humans dieing off. When a group of Neanderthal scientists accidentally create a dimensional bridge to a reality where Humans flourished, they are puzzled by our beliefs in "god" and the supernatural.
After some investigating they figure out our beliefs are caused by, what they term, the "god gene". Humans have it, Neanderthals don't. It causes all kinds of neat and interesting situations that I don't really want to spoil so I won't go into. Book series is good though, so I would definitely recommend checking it out.
There's even broach the subject of "curing" religion.
Slashdot Mirror
As a society we have recognized that providing a safe working environment is in the bests interests of everyone. To accomplish this, there are numerous work and public safety standards mandated by the government that all appropriately licensed "private establishments" must follow. This includes the careful handling, or elimination, of harmful substances in the workplace.
Second hand smoke, a proven carcinogen, is yet another harmful substance that is now finally being regulated.
Not only are the games priced at retail, you have to spend hours downloading a multi-gig title while getting subjected to annoying pop-up ads. Then you also need *their* permission to run your software when you want to; it's just too bad if they put out an update to "Insert Popular Game Here" thats slammed their authentication servers, you can just wait.
It's even worse if you buy the box retail, they *still* make you ask for permission to use what you legally purchased.
With all the negative complaints about Steam outlined in your post, why are you using it again? That's right, the major undertaking of having to "root around" for a game disc.
Is using Steam worth all the trouble and headaches you mentioned in your post just because you want to avoid the relatively minor inconvenience of popping a game disc into your computer?
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Ford for permission to take their cars out for groceries.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Chapters for permission to read their books.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling HMV for permission to listen their CDs.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling Wal-Mart for permission to watch their DVDs.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling The Brick for permission to sit on their couch.
Valve's Steam is the same as people calling EB Games for permission to play an XBox 360 game.
I don't have to beg for permission to do any of the things on the right. With Steam, I do; even when I have the install disc! I don't think that is "very nice".
If they decide to go with a "Reimagined MacGuyver", they should consider getting Michael Welch to play him.
;-)
If RDA isn't able to play the role, they should at least get his clone.
Unfortunately, people automatically assume the worst when a man wants to work with kids; I was strongly advised by my teachers and guidance counsellors to change my mind. I did.
Looking back on it I'm still somewhat sad about it, but at the same time I'm glad about it to. With the current climate I would have lived in constant fear of the kid who got a bad grade, couldn't take it, and them making a false accusation to get back at me. Guilty first, innocent later.
We could argue about the road conditions, the rated speed of the road, or your perception that you're a good driver; none of that matters. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and the posted speed is the posted speed. Don't want to follow the rules of the road as posted? Then don't drive.
I'm not in any way saying you can't exceed the speed limit in an emergency situation. However if you're consistently speeding in defiance of the posted limit, thereby putting law abiding citizens at risk, you deserve the ticket you're going to get.
Thanks for the laugh, I wish I had mod-points.
By the way, have you had the chance to check out the "British Library Special Engineer Force" yet? They're doing amazing, groundbreaking work on human sized paper airplane technology.
I seriously doubt the "classic" hard-drive is going away anytime soon. They're small, tend to be reliable and allow an insanely high number of read/write cycles. I still have drives from 10+ years ago that work just fine (albeit they're a bit small now and don't do much beyond temp storage anymore).
Flash is getting better, but it still allows comparatively much fewer read/write cycles and while they're good for situations requiring limited power needs (lapstops, etc...) they'll need to be replaced more often.
I also doubt that things like flash are going to replace the optical formats for any foreseeable future. A plastic layered disc with a bit of pitted aluminum on it can be manufactured for a price far cheaper than a complex flash based memory storage device. There is a reason I pay less than a buck per disc in a spindle of blank 4.7 GB DVDs and 25-50 bucks for the equivalent 4.7 GB flash memory stick. Media companies are well aware of this too. Right now it's sweet for them, with the economies of scale, they can produce DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, etc... discs for practically nothing and charge the consumer 10 to 40 times the manufacturing costs.
I do agree with you though on the size of the hard-drives. They're getting larger every year, but the portable storage/backup media (blank DVDs) has remained pretty much the same size. I can't wait for this whole format war to die down so the next-gen PC drives become cheaper, I desperately need to backup my 500 GB video editing drive and I don't relish the idea of spanning it over 107 DVD blanks when 10 Blu-Ray or 16 HD-DVD discs would do.
Under your reasoning, why does this particular adult/minor relationship get a pass where greater age differences won't? Both situations involve sex between adults and minors.
Perhaps, as some of the more conservative members of society suggest we do, we should take a lesson from history. It has only been a recent development, the last 125 years or so, that we have increasingly treated our "young adults" as over sized children. In times past, these 15 or 16 year old "minors" would get married and start families, more or less living their lives as any other "adult" would.
Maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with "sex offenders" in our society if we (parents and society in general) stopped treating post pubescent physically mature teenagers like they're five year old children. Instead we should treat them like the young adults they are, recognize this in law, and make them responsible for their actions.
Then we could save the "sex offender" label for those it really should be applied to, people who have sexual contact with pre-pubescent children.
It's not so much the idea of obliterating the business of recorded and sold music that people are talking about. It's the idea of obliterating the business of recorded and sold music by a few high powered cartels designed to keep anyone not approved by them of recording and selling music easily.
I downloaded the sixteen tracks on your main-page. Had you not included your website (which is something I wish more musicians on Slashdot would do when they state "I am a musician") I *never* would have heard of your music. Your stuff is pretty good, put it on a CD and I'll give you $10.00 - $15.00 for it, no problem. For some ideas on selling your own CD's, check out http://www.cdbaby.com/ sure there's more online independent music sellers out there, but it's my favourite.
With "big labels" in control of the media exposure channels, it's nearly impossible for good "niche" musicians to get the word out there. You can't take your stuff to your local radio station as they are filled with and are only allowed to play label approved music. Go the next town over, you'll hear pretty much the same.
Even with Canadian content legislation, unless you're signed by a "big label" you're not going to get any air-play.
That's why most people are saying one of the things new musicians should do is give their stuff away for free and when they have built up enough of a following, go touring and charge for concerts. It's about the only way you're going to get any kind of mass exposure while making money, that could even come close to competing with the kinds of marketing campaigns put out by the labels.
And by all means when you're giving away low quality copies of the album, sell your CD online, or hang around after a show and sell autographed copies of it. People will and do pay if they like a persons stuff and its priced reasonably.
Pete...
PS: I'm really liking the relaxed Jazzy feel on Small Whim.
We live in a society where large monied interests can purchase a law for a few paltry campaign dollars. You honestly don't think that if forced volunteering for Welfare were to be instituted, companies wouldn't lobby to have those rules and guidelines changed to suit their needs?
We would also run the risk of established charities abusing this. Think of the guy who goes and volunteers for "Meals on Wheels", the "Red Cross", or any other charity. He goes to "work" every day, he fulfills the volunteer requirement and we keep paying him his Welfare.
From his point of view, his mortgage is paid, he has food on the table and he worked hard all day. He now has a job.
Sure, the taxpayers are footing the bill and the charity is getting a free worker, so where's the incentive to get off the system?
Until corporations start up "charity and volunteer based subsidiaries" to take advantage of the "free" Welfare paid workforce.
No, life isn't black or white. I never said it was.
;-)
I also never said I had a problem supporting people and/or companies who make products I like. Whether they work for a soulless corporation, or are independent, if I like a person's work and/or product I will legally purchase it, used or new. Although I think it would be tough to buy used DVD-R's.
Still, I think we both could agree; when you buy used, *someone* made the initial purchase. When you purchase that used product, you are compensating the original purchaser for a portion of the original sale.
For example:
* I buy a CD for 20.00 and sell it to you later for 10.00.
* You give me 10.00 bucks up front with the understanding that I would buy the CD, listen to for a few weeks, then give it to you.
In both cases you are contributing money towards something you have stated you did not wish to give money to.
I will grant that you aren't giving them any extra funds, as you would if you bought new. That's not the issue I have. I agree with your stance and buy a lot of used CD's/DVD's (usually out of print, hard to find stuff).
I didn't mean to start an argument, I just wanted to point out the logical fallacy commonly expressed here on Slashdot that somehow buying a used product from a company you hate is somehow sticking it to them. If you really wanted to stick it to them, you wouldn't buy it at all.
Before you ask, yes I have walked the walk. There a quite a few albums that I have *not* purchased, used or new, because they contain DRM on them. I have made the choice not to support artists and/or studios who seek to deny my fair use rights to put my legally purchased music on my iPod.
The same thing that happens to people who don't own cell phones. Or people who turn them off when they go out so people won't disturb them with stupid "Dude! I called your house and got your machine. Where are you?!" calls.
They find out when they get home.
Granted, when you buy used you don't pay the *full* RIAA tax, but you are still contributing to it.
If you truly didn't want to support the studios, you would buy nothing from them ever, used or new.
Unless the person or store you're buying the used CD from originally stole it, the "jerks" have already been paid for it.
Don't fool yourself into feeling all mighty and superior for sticking it to the "jerks" by not buying their stuff new. Eventually you are still buying it. It really doesn't matter whether you buy it new (giving you money to the store) or used (giving your money to the person who gave the store their money), you can't escape the fact that you're giving money to "jerks".
If you truly want to hit the "jerks", look at buying from the independents. I do a fair bit of my music shopping over at http://www.cdbaby.com/ which contains a lot of independent musicians hawking their wares for decent prices. You also get the album artwork and the music on a nice pressed CD (great for archive purposes), although sometimes I'll get one that's obviously from a CD burner.
Do I buy stuff from the "jerks" too? Sure, if I like the music, I support the artist; even if they *were* stupid enough to sign one of the "bend over and take it" contracts the labels like to have bands sign. They might not get much, but at least they get some of my money.
I have a store bought copy of the Half Life 1: Anthology disc. I've never been able to use it. Nowhere on the box did it say, "Requires Steam to be run." So you can imagine my surprise when I tried to install the game and it tried to install Steam instead. I PURCHASED the fracking thing; I have the shiny pressed disc in my hands. Yet they have the audacity to tell me that I need *THEIR* permission to play it whenever I want to.
I tried to take it back to store, but like most places they would only do exchanges on opened software.
So now I'm stuck with this game I have never played and can't return. In effect, Valve has stolen my money while at the same time treating me like a criminal for purchasing their product.
It doesn't matter where I bought it, or what I paid for it. If I exchange my money with a company for one of their products, I own that product and have the right to use it as I deem fit. I should never need to ask for permission from the company every single time I want to use the product I have paid for.
I don't call Mercedes for permission to take my Smart out for groceries, I will not call Valve for permission every time I want to play my legally purchased game.
You are right about this. The airline doing this has nothing to do with net neutrality. This would be like the difference between someone wanting Dial Up and High-Speed Ultra. You pay extra for the better service.
For this to be anti-neutrality, the airport you checked in at would charge you a fee when you checked your luggage in, while the airport you land at would charge a fee to get your luggage back right away, or they would hold it for 48 hours.
The thing is, I see a *huge* problem with having people pay to get their luggage off first. In order for it make the kind of extra cash the CEO is talking about, it'll need to be priced cheaply enough that a significant number of passengers pay the fee.
When they pay the fee, most people are going to assume their particular baggage will be first down the chute. What happens when 40%/50% of the flight pays the fee? They've all paid to have their luggage taken off "first", yet they get to the baggage claim area and rather than just grabbing and going like they expect, they're *still* standing around waiting because it's physically impossible to get all that luggage off "first".
I know I'd be pissed off at having to wait when I've been told I'll have priority baggage handling. What are they going to do, park the baggage truck inside the terminal and just have people who paid the fee take their luggage directly from that?
This is probably off topic, but you might be interested in the "Neanderthal Trilogy" by Robert J. Sawyer http://www.sfwriter.com/exho.htm
In it, he describes a parallel universe where the Neanderthal, not Humans, got the leg up on evolution with the humans dieing off. When a group of Neanderthal scientists accidentally create a dimensional bridge to a reality where Humans flourished, they are puzzled by our beliefs in "god" and the supernatural.
After some investigating they figure out our beliefs are caused by, what they term, the "god gene". Humans have it, Neanderthals don't. It causes all kinds of neat and interesting situations that I don't really want to spoil so I won't go into. Book series is good though, so I would definitely recommend checking it out.
There's even broach the subject of "curing" religion.
It takes a while, but you'll eventually get what you want.
http://galactica1981.tripod.com/SurviveTheAlliance.htm
Pete...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1A2sN0pzdGE
;-)
You're welcome.