Wikipedia isn't a "media", it's a collaborative encyclopedia. Therefore, the only corporations directly threatened by it are encyclopedia manufacturers.
Wikipedia may come under PR attack by any corporation it cites, provided said corporation doesn't like the way it's treated. But that's not particular to what you call "old media" corporations.
In short, I think you've taken a run-of-the-mill post about media consolidation and replaced whatever organization it was originally talking about with "wikipedia", in order to gain karma.
Anime News Network is reporting that Cartoon network will be airing All of Neon Genesis Evangelon which will be heavily edited/Americanized for violence, gore, and nudity.
which in turn will leave more time for commercials, which is exactly what the network wants.
Oh well, there's always P2P to the rescue if you want to see the real McCoy...
You're right though, those disclaimers don't make any sense for medium-less music. I have a feeling that music providers are at such a loss to contain the whole digital-copying phenomenon that they're clinging to their old legalese, or are unable to come up with new legalese that'd cover digital files efficiently. At any rate, I'm quite sure they don't believe in it at all, and just put it there because they always put it there, more or less.
Many classical forms have become pompous, whiny and annoying to modern ears. I, for example, can't stand any Vivaldi, Haendel, Beethoven. I've enjoyed them all, mind you, when I was younger, but I've grown out of it. These days, I enjoy Mahler, Rachmaninoff, or Franck much more, and I'm getting to be really fond of Ligeti, Xenakis and all the really modern composers.
I believe music is like wine: when you start drinking some, you prefer the sweet, easy-going ones. Then as your tastebuds develop, you start getting more and more into wines that you once thought were bitter and undrinkable, and you start "understanding" them more. What I mean is, music, like wine, is an acquired taste.
You may not copy, reproduce, edit, adapt, alter, republish, post, broadcast, transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use this audio in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use.
So I can't give that piece of culture to my grand'ma and my little nephew ? That sucks.
That's pretty standard stuff. You can find very similar disclaimers on CD and cassettes. The point is that you can only *give* it to granny (that is, hand over the CD and part with it yourself).
Of course, nobody's doing it, and the BBC police aren't gonna jump on you the day you give a copy to your grandmother. People have been copying stuff for their friends since it's become possible to copy stuff, and I can't remember anybody getting prosecuted for that, although in theory, it's possible.
My god, can't Microsoft leave anything alone? This is what is going to kill MS;
What alternate reality do you come from? Microsoft has been doing their embrace-and-extend dance for 20 years and it keeps on working: they grab a market, either by buying some existing company, take that market by storm, and they either corner it completely, succeed very well, or pull out early enough so that nobody notices.
The last big failure of Microsoft I can remember was the set-top box market, but then everybody failed miserably in that market anyway. Otherwise, just look at what MS produces: mice, keyboard, office suites, video players, games, consoles, internet portals, TV content, etc etc etc... and none of these activities are failing.
I been getting in the San Francisco Bay Area are usually between $16 to $20 per hour. However, I been getting offers for work outside the SF Bay Area (mostly in Southern California) for $50 to $60 per hour for the same kind of work. Can anyone explain the difference?
The hour is longer in socal. You can tell because all the job offers indicate "willing to be working long hours". Probably to prepare workers for life on another planet that spins more slowly on its axis or something...
Am I the only one who finds filling this out depressing?
You sound like your current job doesn't satisfy you. Which lead to the question: why don't you consider finding another one? Are they hard to come by in your field?
Personally, I have realized that the most important thing in a job is liking it. Because, apart from sleeping at night, working is the second most important activity in a 24h day. Therefore, if you don't like your job, you become miserable.
For me, that meant changing field entirely and taking a big pay cut. I don't regret it though, I have no credits, and I've come to realize money isn't what makes one happy in life.
All in all, I'm glad I left that stupid computer industry: less stress, stable working hours, and a job I like. That's important to me. Maybe you need a big change too?
Could a computer coding job paying just $15 per hour signal something's wrong with the tech world?
There's nothing wrong with the tech world: once, programmers did this obscure, complicated thing called "coding". Nobody else could do it, it was new and cutting edge, and therefore they were paid very well and were very respected.
Now, the industry has matured, computers are ubiquitous, programming languages, IDEs, operating systems, libraries... are numerous, well developed, documented, and the programmer of yesteryear has become a line pisser, paid like any other moderatly skilled worker. I should know, I was one of them (note the past tense:-).
There's nothing wrong with that. All industries go through the same cycle.
Whether G.W. would have won the election or not, my point is that she should have been sanctioned, she and the other 5 justices, for even *thinking* of interfering with a recount. Period. That's not being left- or right-wing, that's plain good sense. Justices have no business interfering with the electoral process, and I still haven't fully recovered from seeing that nobody reacted at all in this country. It's appalling...
I'm outraged that you can think what you said. Anybody who is crooked, slanted, or biased in a position of importance such as the one Mrs. Connor holds should expect to resign when facing massive public outcry. The fact that the US public is so de-politized, apathic and more interested in the Jerry Springer Show than in what happens with their country isn't germane to this imperative.
At least to me, she and the 5 other justices should never EVER have interfered with the electoral process. What kind of a democracy is this? If that's not the sign of a partial justice, I don't know what is.
(And to the moderator who thinks I'm a troll, you're an idiot: you should know the difference between a strong opinion and a troll)
No need for Valenti, Colin Powell has 2 daughters who could be given the soon-to-be-vacant posts. That way, counting the boy, everybody in the Powell family will have taken advantages of daddy's friendship with the prez.
Is that the same Sandra Day O'Connor that stopped the recount and helped Dubya get the cool job in 2000? I'd say it's about time she retires. I only wish she was forced to, by a public scandal, but it never happened.
My point is that inventing the verb "to google" is possible, because it's a pure invention (and why not add nouns and verbs to the dictionary after all). But mangling regular grammar out of recognition isn't possible. "I should of stayed" is a sentence without a verb, therefore without sense. "I should have googled" has sense, given the definition of the recently-added, popular "to google" verb.
What I mean is, if you want to add a fifth wheel to a car, why not, if it works, but don't take away one of the 4 original wheels, because the car won't work anymore on 3.
it's not the diction that matters, but the message. Good grammer is only helpful to get a message across.
Ideally, that'd be right. But unfortunately, apart when you really try to give neutral information (like a cooking recipe or something), when you give a message in a human society, it's almost always about imposing your point of view, converting someone to your point of view, or telling a story that'll captivate your audience, or asking something.
In that light, it's little wonder that your message must be written in properly: just like perfume, the wrapping (packaging, bottle, gift-wrapping) is as important, if not more important than the actual product (which is merely a cheap dose of alcohol-based scented liquid). And just like people buy expensive perfumes in nice wrappings, and not 5 gallon plastic-bottles of the same stuff for cheap, people are much more likely to hear your message if it's written in proper english.
That's just how it is. If you ignore that rule, you won't often get to win an argument, get something you want,... and you're more likely to stagnate at the bottom of the social ladder.
English is a living language, why do i care if "should have" is technically correct according to some english professor somewhere. "should of" is common usage, and in the long term the common usage will win out (once the grammar police die out from old age).
What a strange logic: it's like saying "most people round 100/3 to 33, it's common usage, so when the math police die out of old age, the common usage will win out".
That's stupid because 100/3 != 33, it's completely incorrect, just like "should of" makes absolutely no sense. The only reason most people understand "should of" as "should have" is because they know the correct form is "should have".
Mostly, this seems to manifest itself as varying degrees of poor spelling and grammar: 'definately' instead of 'definitely'; 'should of' instead of 'should have';
Movies have been downloadable for years now, so why suddenly have the feds gone apeshit over Episode 3??
Wow, you know what, I was downloading the complete Knight Rider DVD rip the other day, and I was drenched in cold sweat, expecting my door to be knocked down any minute and an entire SWAT team barging in to arrest me!!
I mean honestly, why do you need to ask? it's obvious Georges Lucas has his hand down many congresscritters' pants, and probably his other hand quietly slipping money in their wallets...
Yes, I can just see the meeting between the 11 nations' head of police: US copper: Sirs, we have been reading this Slashdot site, where Wil Wheaton (no no, stop cursing, he's not *really* like Wesley Crusher) has given us great insight. Want to hear what it is? Germany: Ach, ya, I vant to know vat Vil Vheaton said. France: Oui Oui, let'z ear it! US: Well then, he said we should go after the source of pirated stuff, and not the downloaders. Isn't that very insightful? UK: Bloody hell yes, let's go get the buggers! Canada: Yeah, aboot time we cracked down on 'em hey. Denmark: Dårn right, let's gø! US: So all for Wil's plan? All: Yeah/Oui/Ja/...!!
In short, I'm quite sure the *AAs had the idea too, and they have been working on it for a long time to get 11 countries to pull this off. No need for Wil's input there I think.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're a troll. Here's why:
Wikipedia isn't a "media", it's a collaborative encyclopedia. Therefore, the only corporations directly threatened by it are encyclopedia manufacturers.
Wikipedia may come under PR attack by any corporation it cites, provided said corporation doesn't like the way it's treated. But that's not particular to what you call "old media" corporations.
In short, I think you've taken a run-of-the-mill post about media consolidation and replaced whatever organization it was originally talking about with "wikipedia", in order to gain karma.
Would their credibility stay high if they all stayed at home?
Anime News Network is reporting that Cartoon network will be airing All of Neon Genesis Evangelon which will be heavily edited/Americanized for violence, gore, and nudity.
which in turn will leave more time for commercials, which is exactly what the network wants.
Oh well, there's always P2P to the rescue if you want to see the real McCoy...
In other words he doesn't trust the hardware and/or software being hooked up to his brain.
So true. Here's a proof: unlike Bill, Melinda Gates wasn't against Microsoft implants, and look what happened to her...
expelling material at supersonic speed
Supersonic speed in hard vaccuum? interesting...
Presumably :-)
You're right though, those disclaimers don't make any sense for medium-less music. I have a feeling that music providers are at such a loss to contain the whole digital-copying phenomenon that they're clinging to their old legalese, or are unable to come up with new legalese that'd cover digital files efficiently. At any rate, I'm quite sure they don't believe in it at all, and just put it there because they always put it there, more or less.
Many classical forms have become pompous, whiny and annoying to modern ears. I, for example, can't stand any Vivaldi, Haendel, Beethoven. I've enjoyed them all, mind you, when I was younger, but I've grown out of it. These days, I enjoy Mahler, Rachmaninoff, or Franck much more, and I'm getting to be really fond of Ligeti, Xenakis and all the really modern composers.
I believe music is like wine: when you start drinking some, you prefer the sweet, easy-going ones. Then as your tastebuds develop, you start getting more and more into wines that you once thought were bitter and undrinkable, and you start "understanding" them more. What I mean is, music, like wine, is an acquired taste.
You may not copy, reproduce, edit, adapt, alter, republish, post, broadcast, transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use this audio in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use.
So I can't give that piece of culture to my grand'ma and my little nephew ? That sucks.
That's pretty standard stuff. You can find very similar disclaimers on CD and cassettes. The point is that you can only *give* it to granny (that is, hand over the CD and part with it yourself).
Of course, nobody's doing it, and the BBC police aren't gonna jump on you the day you give a copy to your grandmother. People have been copying stuff for their friends since it's become possible to copy stuff, and I can't remember anybody getting prosecuted for that, although in theory, it's possible.
Now they also want to marry it to my cell phone and my desk phone?
Already done.
My god, can't Microsoft leave anything alone? This is what is going to kill MS;
What alternate reality do you come from? Microsoft has been doing their embrace-and-extend dance for 20 years and it keeps on working: they grab a market, either by buying some existing company, take that market by storm, and they either corner it completely, succeed very well, or pull out early enough so that nobody notices.
The last big failure of Microsoft I can remember was the set-top box market, but then everybody failed miserably in that market anyway. Otherwise, just look at what MS produces: mice, keyboard, office suites, video players, games, consoles, internet portals, TV content, etc etc etc... and none of these activities are failing.
Prepare for the blue screech of death when you pick up the phone!
Sorry...
I been getting in the San Francisco Bay Area are usually between $16 to $20 per hour. However, I been getting offers for work outside the SF Bay Area (mostly in Southern California) for $50 to $60 per hour for the same kind of work. Can anyone explain the difference?
The hour is longer in socal. You can tell because all the job offers indicate "willing to be working long hours". Probably to prepare workers for life on another planet that spins more slowly on its axis or something...
Am I the only one who finds filling this out depressing?
You sound like your current job doesn't satisfy you. Which lead to the question: why don't you consider finding another one? Are they hard to come by in your field?
Personally, I have realized that the most important thing in a job is liking it. Because, apart from sleeping at night, working is the second most important activity in a 24h day. Therefore, if you don't like your job, you become miserable.
For me, that meant changing field entirely and taking a big pay cut. I don't regret it though, I have no credits, and I've come to realize money isn't what makes one happy in life.
All in all, I'm glad I left that stupid computer industry: less stress, stable working hours, and a job I like. That's important to me. Maybe you need a big change too?
Could a computer coding job paying just $15 per hour signal something's wrong with the tech world?
:-).
There's nothing wrong with the tech world: once, programmers did this obscure, complicated thing called "coding". Nobody else could do it, it was new and cutting edge, and therefore they were paid very well and were very respected.
Now, the industry has matured, computers are ubiquitous, programming languages, IDEs, operating systems, libraries... are numerous, well developed, documented, and the programmer of yesteryear has become a line pisser, paid like any other moderatly skilled worker. I should know, I was one of them (note the past tense
There's nothing wrong with that. All industries go through the same cycle.
Whether G.W. would have won the election or not, my point is that she should have been sanctioned, she and the other 5 justices, for even *thinking* of interfering with a recount. Period. That's not being left- or right-wing, that's plain good sense. Justices have no business interfering with the electoral process, and I still haven't fully recovered from seeing that nobody reacted at all in this country. It's appalling...
I'm outraged that you can think what you said. Anybody who is crooked, slanted, or biased in a position of importance such as the one Mrs. Connor holds should expect to resign when facing massive public outcry. The fact that the US public is so de-politized, apathic and more interested in the Jerry Springer Show than in what happens with their country isn't germane to this imperative.
At least to me, she and the 5 other justices should never EVER have interfered with the electoral process. What kind of a democracy is this? If that's not the sign of a partial justice, I don't know what is.
(And to the moderator who thinks I'm a troll, you're an idiot: you should know the difference between a strong opinion and a troll)
No need for Valenti, Colin Powell has 2 daughters who could be given the soon-to-be-vacant posts. That way, counting the boy, everybody in the Powell family will have taken advantages of daddy's friendship with the prez.
Is that the same Sandra Day O'Connor that stopped the recount and helped Dubya get the cool job in 2000? I'd say it's about time she retires. I only wish she was forced to, by a public scandal, but it never happened.
That's what journalism is about!
No wait, did you say it was Wired?...
My point is that inventing the verb "to google" is possible, because it's a pure invention (and why not add nouns and verbs to the dictionary after all). But mangling regular grammar out of recognition isn't possible. "I should of stayed" is a sentence without a verb, therefore without sense. "I should have googled" has sense, given the definition of the recently-added, popular "to google" verb.
What I mean is, if you want to add a fifth wheel to a car, why not, if it works, but don't take away one of the 4 original wheels, because the car won't work anymore on 3.
it's not the diction that matters, but the message. Good grammer is only helpful to get a message across.
Ideally, that'd be right. But unfortunately, apart when you really try to give neutral information (like a cooking recipe or something), when you give a message in a human society, it's almost always about imposing your point of view, converting someone to your point of view, or telling a story that'll captivate your audience, or asking something.
In that light, it's little wonder that your message must be written in properly: just like perfume, the wrapping (packaging, bottle, gift-wrapping) is as important, if not more important than the actual product (which is merely a cheap dose of alcohol-based scented liquid). And just like people buy expensive perfumes in nice wrappings, and not 5 gallon plastic-bottles of the same stuff for cheap, people are much more likely to hear your message if it's written in proper english.
That's just how it is. If you ignore that rule, you won't often get to win an argument, get something you want,... and you're more likely to stagnate at the bottom of the social ladder.
English is a living language, why do i care if "should have" is technically correct according to some english professor somewhere. "should of" is common usage, and in the long term the common usage will win out (once the grammar police die out from old age).
What a strange logic: it's like saying "most people round 100/3 to 33, it's common usage, so when the math police die out of old age, the common usage will win out".
That's stupid because 100/3 != 33, it's completely incorrect, just like "should of" makes absolutely no sense. The only reason most people understand "should of" as "should have" is because they know the correct form is "should have".
Mostly, this seems to manifest itself as varying degrees of poor spelling and grammar: 'definately' instead of 'definitely'; 'should of' instead of 'should have';
You should have used colons here, not semicolons.
Movies have been downloadable for years now, so why suddenly have the feds gone apeshit over Episode 3??
Wow, you know what, I was downloading the complete Knight Rider DVD rip the other day, and I was drenched in cold sweat, expecting my door to be knocked down any minute and an entire SWAT team barging in to arrest me!!
I mean honestly, why do you need to ask? it's obvious Georges Lucas has his hand down many congresscritters' pants, and probably his other hand quietly slipping money in their wallets...
Yes, I can just see the meeting between the 11 nations' head of police:
US copper: Sirs, we have been reading this Slashdot site, where Wil Wheaton (no no, stop cursing, he's not *really* like Wesley Crusher) has given us great insight. Want to hear what it is?
Germany: Ach, ya, I vant to know vat Vil Vheaton said.
France: Oui Oui, let'z ear it!
US: Well then, he said we should go after the source of pirated stuff, and not the downloaders. Isn't that very insightful?
UK: Bloody hell yes, let's go get the buggers!
Canada: Yeah, aboot time we cracked down on 'em hey.
Denmark: Dårn right, let's gø!
US: So all for Wil's plan?
All: Yeah/Oui/Ja/...!!
In short, I'm quite sure the *AAs had the idea too, and they have been working on it for a long time to get 11 countries to pull this off. No need for Wil's input there I think.