It's a pretty interesting world out there. Whether experiencing one of the many wonderous things man has achieved or being within a meter or two of a herd of wild elephants while they bath and play in a watering hole there's an awful lot of great things to experience in the world.
You don't need to do it. But it's a bit of a pointless life if you are contented by mere survival.
I recently had the displeasure of attempting to install Red Hat Enterprise Server 4 on an HP ML115.
Apparantly it's supported but naturally the Red Hat you get from them doesn't have all the necessary drivers. There is a driver page on the HP website, though exactly which driver(s) you may need to make your particular hardware see the disks seems to be left up to guess work. So you try them all one by one and it still won't work.
A lot of wasted time and frustration and for the people paying me by the hour wasted money. Not to mention uncertainty over how external drivers will work with future OS updates.
They are now looking at getting machines that are pre-installed so compatibility won't be an issue going forwards.
If Ubuntu had pre-installed servers her in Aus I'd be on them lickety-split.
No doubt such bands already exist (and sometimes make a reasonable break into the "mainstream" and a boatload of cash in the process).
However in general they must struggle to make a mainstream impact when the big labels are spending a boatload of cash on saturation marketing for their artists (and then clawing the money back off the artists).
Perhaps the best thing about major artists leaving their stables will be a reduction of funds wasted on marketing so that new artists stand a chance of being seen. A return to (authentic) reputation and word of mouth would be great.
The issue isn't whether services will be ad supported, it's whether phones/networks are open to the degree that you can choose what/who to use for different applications/services.
Even if you are paying a phone company they are not going to turn their nose up at an additional revenue source if it is there to be had.
At least with a more open environment the various will have to compete against each other to be less annoying and provide a better experience so you have a reason to choose their app/service. If you just want to be stuck with one provider then ultimately you will get worse service.
Your previous providers were capable of bombarding you with unwanted ads that because they are (or view themselves) as the gatekeepers to your phone and your contract with them as a way to tie you into buying from them only.
With more open phones/networks (ie those not locked down to the extent they often are in the US) there is room for much more competition based on quality of apps and user experience.
I just got a new Nokia N95 ("free" if I commit to a 2 year contract) from Vodafone Australia. The best thing about it is that I can install what I like on it and it will happily do things over WiFi, not costing me a cent. Currently I am loving the Google Mail and playing with the Google Maps applications on it (which seems better than the map app that comes with it.
They are presumably ad supported in some way but I'm using them because they are, as far as I know, the nicest applications available for the purpose.
Your phone company will screw you for what they can and will supplement their income with ads anyway if they get the opportunity (though likely in a more annoying and incompetant way than Google will). However you will be better off in situations where your phone is open and allows applications and service from different providers as those provider will have to compete more.
If you buy it on the same account they could probably work it out.
In fact that would be quite an interesting stat, how many people will pay (more) for something after they already have it?
Would also be interesting to see how many people buy it again for convenience, ie rather than copying it to a second PC or to show a friend they just "buy" it again for a buck or so.
I thought it was interesting yet simple.
It may be experiencing load problems now it's new but it's not probably not worth investing a boatload of money to cater for a peak server load that will only be experienced at initial launch.
Right, I'm pretentious because I claim that MP3s are an inferior format
No you are pretentious because you call them worthless, because from on top of your high horse you can't even see what is useful and enjoyable for an awful lot of people.
and the guy that turns his inability to take any criticism of his preferred format into a personal attack
I don't even have an MP3 player (other than my computer). I tend to listen to the radio in my car (so I hear new music) and CDs at home. I have a few LPs but no record player. I have DVDs, the odd DVD-audio, some VCDs (A Pink Floyd concert is still enjoyable even with some heavy artifacting) and even some wierd "CD Video" things.
There's a lot of formats out there, all with pros and cons, but if you spend too much time worrying about all the problems you'll lose sight of why music is enjoyable in the first place.
40 quid isn't bad for two CDs, two LPs, digital download, a nice book and shipping.
It's assinine to be crapping on about "dynamic range" and so forth. Given the albums provenance it will probably sound like Radiohead want it to sound which is where the actual value lays for people who like their music.
I mean I can see the sense in the fact that more games will drive sales, but I don't see why people would pay more for a console when there are only a few titles* why not drop the price,
Because if you sell at a lower price you take a bigger loss on the console which means you need to sell more games (of which there aren't many of) to recoup the loss and actually make a profit.
That's probably why a blu ray focus makes at least some sense. Producing a reasonable amount of game content is going to take a lot more effort and time than putting out a Blu-ray version of already existing movies. It therefore makes sense to try and sell to a market that will buy the content that you are actually in a position to sell content to.
Why is it important to show what packages are installed when there are standard ways to get that information when you boot into the os the first time?
Installations that ask a lot of silly questions waste much more time/work. I can't imagine how much time I've wasted installing versions of Linux where I've walked away to work on something else while it's whirring away only to have it stop because it wants me to baby sit it through a series of choices that I don't really need to make at that stage.
Just install and let me do any configuration from within the OS.
The comments were made during his retirement speech to parliament where recounted some of the more interesting things that had happened in his time (and generally waffled).
Specifically, the question is whether you can accept one license and not the other
I think you can as:
a) There'd be no point in dual licensing otherwise
b) That's the plain and most obvious meaning of the word "alternatively" which is the word most often used (and used in this specific case I believe) when offering dual licences.
(I seem to recall that some files in this case may not have been dual licensed, but that is another issue).
If I sync clips of The Muppet Show with a Snoop Dog song..... then copyright is depriving the world of the value of that work
Perhaps not the best example but I take your point;)
I guess that counter argument is that if you (and others) had those rights then the financial incentive that allows/gives incentive for the Muppet Show to be produced and Snoop to produce his songs may be diminished and they may not exist in the first place, denying the world both the originals and your hypothetical derived works.
There seems to be (not with you specifically) a stong undercurrent of people who want to do something considering that something "fair". That is understandable, but not really overly pertinent in discussion of how a system is constructed that both creates incentive for new works and also gives human beings reasonable access to their culture in a more general sense.
There is a difference between using someones audio work in another audio work and using someones audio work in another audio-visual work?
I agree there is a difference, but don't see how one of them is necessarily "fair use" and the other isn't. If "fair use" were to allow combination of audio and video why not audio and audio? If the author wanted that they wouldn't have chosen an no derivative licence.
Nor am I sure how you could account for the difference in a generic licence without specifically mentioning particular media.
Perhaps it would involve some language about allowing "combined" rather than "derived" works where the original work is allowed to be used if it is "unmodified". How you'd define "unmodified" I don't know. It would need to allow necessary technical modifications to allow the combination while not allowing qualitative changes.
What you really need is more music produced with a less restrictive licence rather than trying to force people using the No derivative to allow derivatives. Either that or find a piece of music you like and actually ask the author if you can use it.
Slashdot Mirror
You have wild elephants in Oregon?
Perhaps I need to put Oregon on my "places to go" list......
But it'd make a pretty sad life.
It's a pretty interesting world out there. Whether experiencing one of the many wonderous things man has achieved or being within a meter or two of a herd of wild elephants while they bath and play in a watering hole there's an awful lot of great things to experience in the world.
You don't need to do it. But it's a bit of a pointless life if you are contented by mere survival.
Thanks for the suggestion. We're actually going to download RHEL5 from RHN and give that a go. Still a bit of a waste of my time :)
I recently had the displeasure of attempting to install Red Hat Enterprise Server 4 on an HP ML115. Apparantly it's supported but naturally the Red Hat you get from them doesn't have all the necessary drivers. There is a driver page on the HP website, though exactly which driver(s) you may need to make your particular hardware see the disks seems to be left up to guess work. So you try them all one by one and it still won't work.
A lot of wasted time and frustration and for the people paying me by the hour wasted money. Not to mention uncertainty over how external drivers will work with future OS updates.
They are now looking at getting machines that are pre-installed so compatibility won't be an issue going forwards.
If Ubuntu had pre-installed servers her in Aus I'd be on them lickety-split.
No doubt such bands already exist (and sometimes make a reasonable break into the "mainstream" and a boatload of cash in the process).
However in general they must struggle to make a mainstream impact when the big labels are spending a boatload of cash on saturation marketing for their artists (and then clawing the money back off the artists).
Perhaps the best thing about major artists leaving their stables will be a reduction of funds wasted on marketing so that new artists stand a chance of being seen. A return to (authentic) reputation and word of mouth would be great.
The issue isn't whether services will be ad supported, it's whether phones/networks are open to the degree that you can choose what/who to use for different applications/services.
Even if you are paying a phone company they are not going to turn their nose up at an additional revenue source if it is there to be had.
At least with a more open environment the various will have to compete against each other to be less annoying and provide a better experience so you have a reason to choose their app/service. If you just want to be stuck with one provider then ultimately you will get worse service.
Your previous providers were capable of bombarding you with unwanted ads that because they are (or view themselves) as the gatekeepers to your phone and your contract with them as a way to tie you into buying from them only.
With more open phones/networks (ie those not locked down to the extent they often are in the US) there is room for much more competition based on quality of apps and user experience.
I just got a new Nokia N95 ("free" if I commit to a 2 year contract) from Vodafone Australia. The best thing about it is that I can install what I like on it and it will happily do things over WiFi, not costing me a cent. Currently I am loving the Google Mail and playing with the Google Maps applications on it (which seems better than the map app that comes with it.
They are presumably ad supported in some way but I'm using them because they are, as far as I know, the nicest applications available for the purpose.
Your phone company will screw you for what they can and will supplement their income with ads anyway if they get the opportunity (though likely in a more annoying and incompetant way than Google will). However you will be better off in situations where your phone is open and allows applications and service from different providers as those provider will have to compete more.
If you buy it on the same account they could probably work it out.
In fact that would be quite an interesting stat, how many people will pay (more) for something after they already have it?
Would also be interesting to see how many people buy it again for convenience, ie rather than copying it to a second PC or to show a friend they just "buy" it again for a buck or so.
I thought it was interesting yet simple. It may be experiencing load problems now it's new but it's not probably not worth investing a boatload of money to cater for a peak server load that will only be experienced at initial launch.
There's a lot of formats out there, all with pros and cons, but if you spend too much time worrying about all the problems you'll lose sight of why music is enjoyable in the first place.
then there probably wouldn't be much point in music in the first place.
There is more to life than game theory, thankfully.
40 quid isn't bad for two CDs, two LPs, digital download, a nice book and shipping.
It's assinine to be crapping on about "dynamic range" and so forth. Given the albums provenance it will probably sound like Radiohead want it to sound which is where the actual value lays for people who like their music.
"Land of the free" seems a bit passe.
How about:
"We're shitscared!"
That's probably why a blu ray focus makes at least some sense. Producing a reasonable amount of game content is going to take a lot more effort and time than putting out a Blu-ray version of already existing movies. It therefore makes sense to try and sell to a market that will buy the content that you are actually in a position to sell content to.
1. Take a photo and release it under CC with attribution
2. Wait till the attribution leads you hear about someone using it
3. Sue
4. Profit!
Plus of course games where you get the best of both worlds, like The Godfather: Blackhand edition.
Why is it important to show what packages are installed when there are standard ways to get that information when you boot into the os the first time?
Installations that ask a lot of silly questions waste much more time/work. I can't imagine how much time I've wasted installing versions of Linux where I've walked away to work on something else while it's whirring away only to have it stop because it wants me to baby sit it through a series of choices that I don't really need to make at that stage.
Just install and let me do any configuration from within the OS.
The comments were made during his retirement speech to parliament where recounted some of the more interesting things that had happened in his time (and generally waffled).
a) There'd be no point in dual licensing otherwise
b) That's the plain and most obvious meaning of the word "alternatively" which is the word most often used (and used in this specific case I believe) when offering dual licences.
(I seem to recall that some files in this case may not have been dual licensed, but that is another issue).
I guess that counter argument is that if you (and others) had those rights then the financial incentive that allows/gives incentive for the Muppet Show to be produced and Snoop to produce his songs may be diminished and they may not exist in the first place, denying the world both the originals and your hypothetical derived works.
There seems to be (not with you specifically) a stong undercurrent of people who want to do something considering that something "fair". That is understandable, but not really overly pertinent in discussion of how a system is constructed that both creates incentive for new works and also gives human beings reasonable access to their culture in a more general sense.
There is a difference between using someones audio work in another audio work and using someones audio work in another audio-visual work?
I agree there is a difference, but don't see how one of them is necessarily "fair use" and the other isn't. If "fair use" were to allow combination of audio and video why not audio and audio? If the author wanted that they wouldn't have chosen an no derivative licence.
Nor am I sure how you could account for the difference in a generic licence without specifically mentioning particular media.
Perhaps it would involve some language about allowing "combined" rather than "derived" works where the original work is allowed to be used if it is "unmodified". How you'd define "unmodified" I don't know. It would need to allow necessary technical modifications to allow the combination while not allowing qualitative changes.
What you really need is more music produced with a less restrictive licence rather than trying to force people using the No derivative to allow derivatives. Either that or find a piece of music you like and actually ask the author if you can use it.