Come on, have you ever heard Tull in concert? When they do Beltaine it rocks. So, maybe it isn't exactly Master of Puppets but who can understand those Metallica boys anyway. No sir, real metal has lyrics you can understand and relate to, not the barking of dogs followed by shrill high pitched warbling about driving silver stakes through tongues to keep them from blaspheme.
And here I was thinking Ian Anderson had a solid gold flute, which was considerably more heavy than standar flutes....
Its really amazing that they actually gave it to him. The RIAA sort of hates him for making their product more reasonably priced. I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago, not accounting for inflation.
The Planet Money radio show (also a podcast) has had a lot of content lately about where money comes/goes in the music industry. Did you know, for example, that in 2011 Katy Perry's content (her "Teenage Dream" cd and associated singles) netted the recording studio that holds the contract about $8 million (out of about $45 million in sales) and sales via iTunes netted Apple, Inc about $8 million (from about $25M in sales)... So yes, they love him and they hate him, he won just as much profit from the work, by having a glorified web site to sell it on, as the recording studio did that put the whole thing together. The bottom line is though, that without iTunes in place those downloads could have very well not profited the recording industry *at all*...
Someone is overlooking something, somewhere. The sale of physical recordings passes through distributors, transportation & logisitics and then to the retailer. All of them got a cut, so iTunes simply removed the physical and time to market aspects. One copy becomes n copies when downloaded.. no need to forcast and take a risk on how many pressings are needed, etc.
They cut out massive costs for manufacturing and wound up making more on iTunes than they margin they made on CD's. Of course they'd love him.
Manufacturing, distributions, logistics, returns, etc. A lot of cost removed, but the time to market is also greatly reduced. Cut an album, master it and publish it online.
Today: "Yeah, Steve screwed us, but at least he didn't post the video on YouTube."
2050: "The MPAA and RIAA led the fight to make media cheaper and more accessible worldwide."
Come to think of it, the survivors of the Confederate States of America went through the same mental gymnastics.
iTunes really was a saviour for the music industry, stupidly they clung to the belief their old business model was the only way. Now that they're all rolling in bigger piles of money than before, they want to hold the Kill Switch on our internet because every single one of is is either a Pirate or Pirate in Potentia.
Yeah, nothing the Music Industry does through the Grammys surprises me. I gave up on those awards years ago because the awards are more about directing public attention in the direction the industry wants people to look, rather than giving awards based upon actual merit. At least the Oscars still is democratic enough to give awards to people who really do deserve them.. at least, more often than the Grammys do.
That said... who knows, maybe the Oscars will disappoint and hand Steve Jobs a special posthumous Oscar for giving the Computer Generated Animation segment of Cinema a higher watermark, though his support of Pixar.
Picture quality? Maybe if you're into seeing the pancake makeup and ridiculous quantity of hair gel necessary to make your Sitcom/Soap stars look the way they do. Not going to really help animation at all, a little blur helps hide the sharp contrast of lines. Great for sports, so you can rest assured you're right when you call the ref an idiot for getting the call wrong, while you smugly watch the replays in High Def.
More likely going to find the user experience is more a la carte, as people leave the traditional broadcast, cable, and satellite networks for what they pick and choose over the internet (assuming ISPs don't kill the fledgling market with opressive fees for bandwidth, as IF my piddly 6 Mb/s connection should be considered taxing of their infrastructure. where's 100Mb/s?!?) I'd rather see my shows when it suits me, without even bothering with recording them on a DVR.
The TV itself could have the bits built in, but at the present rate of change I'd prefer an external box which I can upgrade as needed while the big investment, the display, is only bought every 5 or 10 years (or longer apart -- my only TV is really getting on in years, but still works.)
Any worse than the random google trucks taking pics of people taking out the trash au naturale?
Or is this like if everyone had the power to do a wiretap on demand?
What do you guys think
Considering he's a Political Science Prof, it makes more sense in this early century as surveillence is all the rage for Political reasons (know your enemy, where he shops, where he buys gas and which CostCo is his favourite.)
Rather than using the methane in cars would be to run it directly into an electrical generation plant. More efficient. Local landfills are collecting the methane, one is uses it to power generators and the other uses the methane to heat city schools.
A friend of mine has designed landfills for Natural Gas production and recovery -- peak production in 50 years, with a life span of about 100 years. Not huge amounts, but as you say, sufficient for a small community or a local industrial park is possible with the proper planning.
Much more of this can be done, if people would get their community leaders to plan how waste is processed and disposed of, rather than the out-of-sight-out-of-mind most people adopt.
Does it rot in the field, providing fertilizer for the next generation of crops and thus reducing the overall costs due to the fact so much artificial fertilizer doesn't need to be used? It isn't waste if it is actually being used for something.
Yes. The stalks, top leafs, roots, unripe or spoiled produce becomes food for the next crop, usually some other crop in a rotation. There's a lot of science behind this, too, as some crops enrich the soil, f'risnstance with Nitrogen, for the next crop which is more dependent upon it (usually something leafy) as an example.
I live in the middle of an agriINDUSTRY area. Most of the agricultural waste is left to rot in the fields. To bring it to some place where it could be processed into fuel would consume fuel. Further, much of this waste is recycled into the soil by insects, worms, fungi and bacteria to become fertilizer for the next crop (lest the soil become exhausted.)
It's a neat idea, but you can use any hydrocarbon waste for this process - cardboard, paper or wood scraps.
maybe he thought that just showing it to world was enough to make it unpatentable.
like it should.
Somewhere in all the proceedings of this case and its coverage in the press I read a fascinating and disturbing tidbit - Just because something has been done before does not prevent it being patented. That's what this case was about, in a nutshell. Something was done before then repeated, with whatever modifications these people believed they had invented, so they applied for patent. Goof by the USPTO? You could say that, but the reality was "Internet", "Web" were unknowns and unfamiliar ground. Simply extrapolating earlier computer network, which the good old ARPANET was part of for collaboration with university people could have given some idea, but USPTO processors likely didn't look in that direction or even consider some of the old Wang systems, which could be argued as being an Internet, albeit more limited, as more than one person could work on the same ledger from various locations.
There's no end to bad patents and there's likely no end to them being trolled. At least this big one was sorted. Really, this would have been the short hairs of the world.
Since US patents have no validity outside US borders the rest of the world would have just collectively rolled its eyes yet again at daft US patents and moved on if he had have won.
But any multinational with a toehold within US would have been subject to the outcome, no matter how odious. It is by these means US law may be employed to guide business and government beyond US borders.
You bet. Next thing you know they will be as great as states like California./sarcasm
If you had said Los Angeles Your jibe might have been 217% more effective than other leading brands, as it was it left me feeling unfulfilled and listless.
A frivolous patent troll's suit is stricken down in a Texas court?
What is the world coming to??
Despite their reputation as a back-roads people (who are now depended upon for a number of Patent Trolling cases), they got it. Does this restore some faith in mankind? I'd certainly like it to. Suggests to me these people are a cut above. Well done them. May diminish Tyler, Texas as a place to set up 1 room offices with a sole employee, placed there so Patent Trolls can try their luck at suckering judges and juries for really big zorkmids.
That is never really going to happen. Energy demand is always going to increase. Even if energy usage drops to 1 joule per appliance, people are still going to have more and more appliances and require more and more power for more and more advanced technology.
So if I plug a 10 ohm, 10,000 watt (1%, because I'm all about quality) resistor into my wall outlet and watch it glow, I'm progressing?
Fascinating.
The most fascinating part is the twisted logic you used to mangle the parent's point so that you could come across as a smug little know-it-all. By your own logic, your plea for a reduction in energy usage advocates genocide (less people, less energy usage).
Your words, not mine. I advocate less energy dependence per person, at a time when we have seen our dependence, per person, increase beyond where it was before as we find we "need" more more energy consuming devices.
More people is a good thing too? Everyone in the world coming up to US energy consumption? Another way to get more energy per individuals is to have fewer individuals. Now that would be progress!
Consider - until 1980 most people in China, the world's most populous nation, used very little energy - electrical or petrol.
They are increasing, per capita and en masse. China as it raises the standard of living of each individual places an increasing burden upon available resources as they approach the level, per capita, of the United States - a nation at least 5 times the population of the United States. Think about where this is going.
I am disgusted to discover that a politician would hire people to say nice things about them and bad things about their opponents. This must stop at once.
Things in Russia are more like they are now than they have ever been before.
Internet troll running pro-Kremlin group, seeking to buy flattering coverage of Vladimir Putin, by hatching plans to discredit opposition activists and media, according to private emails allegedly hacked by a group calling itself the Russian arm of Anonymous operates program similar to long-time Chinese, which some commentators have suggested that a similar program exists in Russia, confirms for the first time YOU!
We shouldn't have to use less energy. That defeats the entire point of progress. Using more energy is a good thing because its a sign you are capable of things that require that much power. But we do need to make sure we can provide for our power needs.
So if I plug a 10 ohm, 10,000 watt (1%, because I'm all about quality) resistor into my wall outlet and watch it glow, I'm progressing?
Alan Parsons says things thousands already know. It makes news because it's Alan Parsons saying it. If I said the same thing (which I sometimes have) people do not stop what they're doing, drop their jaws and mouth "oh.. muh.. gawd"
I know some audiophiles who do pay attention to room acoustics. I've attended a few CES, the audiophile stuff, where you can often find companies present who will come to your home/business/site, perform materials, surface, etc., analysis and make changes as necessary for optimal experience.
Jonas Brothers? That's as much about a jug band in Backwater, Tennessee, as a pop group - they deliver what the audience expects, not an audiophile experience (*smirk* imagine someone spending 10,000$US to get the most out of a Teen Pop band. LOL) That aside, a lot of music is cranked out with horrible production quality, because the consumer doesn't care. But he said that. Nothing new there, for the past 100+ years.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, have you ever heard Tull in concert? When they do Beltaine it rocks. So, maybe it isn't exactly Master of Puppets but who can understand those Metallica boys anyway. No sir, real metal has lyrics you can understand and relate to, not the barking of dogs followed by shrill high pitched warbling about driving silver stakes through tongues to keep them from blaspheme.
And here I was thinking Ian Anderson had a solid gold flute, which was considerably more heavy than standar flutes....
Its really amazing that they actually gave it to him. The RIAA sort of hates him for making their product more reasonably priced. I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago, not accounting for inflation.
The Planet Money radio show (also a podcast) has had a lot of content lately about where money comes/goes in the music industry. Did you know, for example, that in 2011 Katy Perry's content (her "Teenage Dream" cd and associated singles) netted the recording studio that holds the contract about $8 million (out of about $45 million in sales) and sales via iTunes netted Apple, Inc about $8 million (from about $25M in sales)... So yes, they love him and they hate him, he won just as much profit from the work, by having a glorified web site to sell it on, as the recording studio did that put the whole thing together. The bottom line is though, that without iTunes in place those downloads could have very well not profited the recording industry *at all*...
Someone is overlooking something, somewhere. The sale of physical recordings passes through distributors, transportation & logisitics and then to the retailer. All of them got a cut, so iTunes simply removed the physical and time to market aspects. One copy becomes n copies when downloaded .. no need to forcast and take a risk on how many pressings are needed, etc.
They cut out massive costs for manufacturing and wound up making more on iTunes than they margin they made on CD's. Of course they'd love him.
Manufacturing, distributions, logistics, returns, etc. A lot of cost removed, but the time to market is also greatly reduced. Cut an album, master it and publish it online.
Today: "Yeah, Steve screwed us, but at least he didn't post the video on YouTube."
2050: "The MPAA and RIAA led the fight to make media cheaper and more accessible worldwide."
Come to think of it, the survivors of the Confederate States of America went through the same mental gymnastics.
iTunes really was a saviour for the music industry, stupidly they clung to the belief their old business model was the only way. Now that they're all rolling in bigger piles of money than before, they want to hold the Kill Switch on our internet because every single one of is is either a Pirate or Pirate in Potentia.
What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
WTF are you talking about?!?!
They did give a Heavy Metal Grammy to my favorite metal act: Jethro Tull.
Yeah, nothing the Music Industry does through the Grammys surprises me. I gave up on those awards years ago because the awards are more about directing public attention in the direction the industry wants people to look, rather than giving awards based upon actual merit. At least the Oscars still is democratic enough to give awards to people who really do deserve them .. at least, more often than the Grammys do.
That said... who knows, maybe the Oscars will disappoint and hand Steve Jobs a special posthumous Oscar for giving the Computer Generated Animation segment of Cinema a higher watermark, though his support of Pixar.
Picture quality? Maybe if you're into seeing the pancake makeup and ridiculous quantity of hair gel necessary to make your Sitcom/Soap stars look the way they do. Not going to really help animation at all, a little blur helps hide the sharp contrast of lines. Great for sports, so you can rest assured you're right when you call the ref an idiot for getting the call wrong, while you smugly watch the replays in High Def.
More likely going to find the user experience is more a la carte, as people leave the traditional broadcast, cable, and satellite networks for what they pick and choose over the internet (assuming ISPs don't kill the fledgling market with opressive fees for bandwidth, as IF my piddly 6 Mb/s connection should be considered taxing of their infrastructure. where's 100Mb/s?!?) I'd rather see my shows when it suits me, without even bothering with recording them on a DVR.
The TV itself could have the bits built in, but at the present rate of change I'd prefer an external box which I can upgrade as needed while the big investment, the display, is only bought every 5 or 10 years (or longer apart -- my only TV is really getting on in years, but still works.)
personal surveillance drones ?
Any worse than the random google trucks taking pics of people taking out the trash au naturale?
Or is this like if everyone had the power to do a wiretap on demand?
What do you guys think
Considering he's a Political Science Prof, it makes more sense in this early century as surveillence is all the rage for Political reasons (know your enemy, where he shops, where he buys gas and which CostCo is his favourite.)
Us it against 'em. That's the modern way.
I know where you were last weekend
Rather than using the methane in cars would be to run it directly into an electrical generation plant. More efficient. Local landfills are collecting the methane, one is uses it to power generators and the other uses the methane to heat city schools.
A friend of mine has designed landfills for Natural Gas production and recovery -- peak production in 50 years, with a life span of about 100 years. Not huge amounts, but as you say, sufficient for a small community or a local industrial park is possible with the proper planning.
Much more of this can be done, if people would get their community leaders to plan how waste is processed and disposed of, rather than the out-of-sight-out-of-mind most people adopt.
Does it rot in the field, providing fertilizer for the next generation of crops and thus reducing the overall costs due to the fact so much artificial fertilizer doesn't need to be used? It isn't waste if it is actually being used for something.
Yes. The stalks, top leafs, roots, unripe or spoiled produce becomes food for the next crop, usually some other crop in a rotation. There's a lot of science behind this, too, as some crops enrich the soil, f'risnstance with Nitrogen, for the next crop which is more dependent upon it (usually something leafy) as an example.
I live in the middle of an agriINDUSTRY area. Most of the agricultural waste is left to rot in the fields. To bring it to some place where it could be processed into fuel would consume fuel. Further, much of this waste is recycled into the soil by insects, worms, fungi and bacteria to become fertilizer for the next crop (lest the soil become exhausted.)
It's a neat idea, but you can use any hydrocarbon waste for this process - cardboard, paper or wood scraps.
maybe he thought that just showing it to world was enough to make it unpatentable.
like it should.
Somewhere in all the proceedings of this case and its coverage in the press I read a fascinating and disturbing tidbit - Just because something has been done before does not prevent it being patented. That's what this case was about, in a nutshell. Something was done before then repeated, with whatever modifications these people believed they had invented, so they applied for patent. Goof by the USPTO? You could say that, but the reality was "Internet", "Web" were unknowns and unfamiliar ground. Simply extrapolating earlier computer network, which the good old ARPANET was part of for collaboration with university people could have given some idea, but USPTO processors likely didn't look in that direction or even consider some of the old Wang systems, which could be argued as being an Internet, albeit more limited, as more than one person could work on the same ledger from various locations.
There's no end to bad patents and there's likely no end to them being trolled. At least this big one was sorted. Really, this would have been the short hairs of the world.
Since US patents have no validity outside US borders the rest of the world would have just collectively rolled its eyes yet again at daft US patents and moved on if he had have won.
But any multinational with a toehold within US would have been subject to the outcome, no matter how odious. It is by these means US law may be employed to guide business and government beyond US borders.
You bet. Next thing you know they will be as great as states like California. /sarcasm
If you had said Los Angeles Your jibe might have been 217% more effective than other leading brands, as it was it left me feeling unfulfilled and listless.
A frivolous patent troll's suit is stricken down in a Texas court?
What is the world coming to??
Despite their reputation as a back-roads people (who are now depended upon for a number of Patent Trolling cases), they got it. Does this restore some faith in mankind? I'd certainly like it to. Suggests to me these people are a cut above. Well done them. May diminish Tyler, Texas as a place to set up 1 room offices with a sole employee, placed there so Patent Trolls can try their luck at suckering judges and juries for really big zorkmids.
Though I don't read MAD much any more, I'm familiar with the Nelson Muntz character and the mimicking of his laugh as a meme... it's called Nelsoning.
And I agree wholeheartedly with the OP, Ha - Ha!
I'd also like to tell Eolas pondscum to "Suck it!"
In Soviet Russia IIIII'm the CAAAT!
That is never really going to happen. Energy demand is always going to increase. Even if energy usage drops to 1 joule per appliance, people are still going to have more and more appliances and require more and more power for more and more advanced technology.
The most fascinating part is the twisted logic you used to mangle the parent's point so that you could come across as a smug little know-it-all. By your own logic, your plea for a reduction in energy usage advocates genocide (less people, less energy usage).
Your words, not mine. I advocate less energy dependence per person, at a time when we have seen our dependence, per person, increase beyond where it was before as we find we "need" more more energy consuming devices.
More people is a good thing too? Everyone in the world coming up to US energy consumption?
Another way to get more energy per individuals is to have fewer individuals. Now that would be progress!
Consider - until 1980 most people in China, the world's most populous nation, used very little energy - electrical or petrol.
They are increasing, per capita and en masse. China as it raises the standard of living of each individual places an increasing burden upon available resources as they approach the level, per capita, of the United States - a nation at least 5 times the population of the United States. Think about where this is going.
I read that as "astrosurfing program" and it sounded a lot better than a couple of hired goons shilling for Uncle Vlad. Oh well...
The word on the street is that you abuse houseplants and extort cheese from small rodents.
I am disgusted to discover that a politician would hire people to say nice things about them and bad things about their opponents. This must stop at once.
Things in Russia are more like they are now than they have ever been before.
So... hacked Russian emails reveal politics are happening in Russia? Is that all this article's about?
It's more like the old days of the Cagey Bee, but with less of the Siberian Travel In Your Near Future found in fortune cookie.
Internet troll running pro-Kremlin group, seeking to buy flattering coverage of Vladimir Putin, by hatching plans to discredit opposition activists and media, according to private emails allegedly hacked by a group calling itself the Russian arm of Anonymous operates program similar to long-time Chinese, which some commentators have suggested that a similar program exists in Russia, confirms for the first time YOU!
All those action hero images of Putin weren't real?
My faith in mankind is ruined.
In Soviet Russia internet trolls YOU!
We shouldn't have to use less energy. That defeats the entire point of progress. Using more energy is a good thing because its a sign you are capable of things that require that much power. But we do need to make sure we can provide for our power needs.
So if I plug a 10 ohm, 10,000 watt (1%, because I'm all about quality) resistor into my wall outlet and watch it glow, I'm progressing?
Fascinating.
Alan Parsons says things thousands already know. It makes news because it's Alan Parsons saying it. If I said the same thing (which I sometimes have) people do not stop what they're doing, drop their jaws and mouth "oh .. muh .. gawd"
I know some audiophiles who do pay attention to room acoustics. I've attended a few CES, the audiophile stuff, where you can often find companies present who will come to your home/business/site, perform materials, surface, etc., analysis and make changes as necessary for optimal experience.
Jonas Brothers? That's as much about a jug band in Backwater, Tennessee, as a pop group - they deliver what the audience expects, not an audiophile experience (*smirk* imagine someone spending 10,000$US to get the most out of a Teen Pop band. LOL) That aside, a lot of music is cranked out with horrible production quality, because the consumer doesn't care. But he said that. Nothing new there, for the past 100+ years.