I still don't think that a wartime economy is applicable to modern energy production, but I absolutely agree: The US economy in WW2 was centrally controlled, and worked more or less as designed.
Apple opts not to license the secured WMA that other music stores use. They also have not yet opted to license FairPlay to other people. However, they have taken no action whatsoever to force labels to do exclusive deals with iTunes.
They've engaged in exactly zero predatory and/or anticompetitive licensing behavior.
It's silly to compare the Apple monopoly to the Microsoft monopoly. All you have to do to not buy Apple stuff, is not buy Apple stuff. You can still do whatever you want. That's becoming more true of Microsoft's monopoly (their grip is weakening), but that has not always been the case.
I wouldn't presume to impugn the value judgements you make on what is a good use of your time and political savvy. It's none of my affair. I've managed to be a science fiction fan my entire life without associating with a club. You like associating with a club. Good for you. Good for me. Freedom is cool.
They have a right to try, although I reserve the right to be annoyed when they do. If their business model depends on my cooperation, it's doomed to failure.
I wonder (I know, this is going to blow your mind) if you, perhaps, have a different set of priorities than some other people. Some people might not share your priority structure. Some people might think that your priority structure is profoundly unsuitable for them.
What is your example of a functioning centrally controlled economy?
Any number that gets pulled out of any ass will almost always be the wrong number for most scenarios. That's why there's an energy market. Enron debacle aside, supply and demand seem to do a good job of pricing energy without any ass-pulling.
I am dealing with it, thanks. Adblock works great. I'm not getting much in the way of spam. I've got a TiVo, and if the ads on that get any more intrusive, building an HTPC is becoming an ever more wife-friendly proposition. I've got GreenCine for movies, and some of my favorite magazines don't have ads in them. I'm making your advertisements progressively less intrusive and more irrelevant. Target all you want: I will still not tolerate your crap.
So I'm doing just fine getting along in the world with fewer advertisements.
I don't care about what the advertisers think. I don't want them to be part of my life, ever.
You seem to be arguing that targetted advertising is going to be the thing that makes advertising work better. I want advertising to stop completely. Our viewpoints are not compatible.
No, that is one example of manipulative, dishonest advertising.
Google is one advertiser that does an awfully good job of not pissing me off. They are about the only one I've ever seen.
You don't WANT me to compare two products. You want me to buy YOUR product. I want to make a decision based on MY needs, of which you are completely ignorant, and I want to keep you that way.
Why do sugary breakfast cereals advertise during cartoons? Kids don't buy sugary breakfast cereals. Kids, who have been convinced that sugary breakfast cereals are a good idea, ask their parents to buy sugary breakfast cereals. If the parent says "No", the child becomes intolerable. How do I know? Because I was such a child.
What possible non-manipulative reason can you have to advertise to people who can't buy your product?
How nice for you to give me credit. It's almost like you're trying to convince me that my opinion is not correct. You're taking your work home with you.
Explain to me the Pepsi Challenge. Cold, fresh Pepsi vs. warm, flat Coke? Yeah, that's not manipulative and dishonest, is it? I'd be very happy if advertisers stopped trying to convince me that the other brand of soda really does taste better. I know what I like, you don't, leave me the hell alone.
Where do I go when I'm looking for something? I go to Pricewatch. I go to Froogle. I actively avoid places that try to convince me that their brand will get me whiter teeth and fresher breath.
Comparison shopping is totally antithetical to the profession of advertising.
I have no issue whatsoever with you providing me information when I ask for it. I have a big issue with you (note that this is a collective "you", as in "you advertiser") try to reprogram my (hypothetical) kids to eat sugary breakfast cereal.
And don't even try to tell me that that's not manipulative.
I don't like any ads at all. I think your entire business is founded on manipulation, deception, and brain washing. You have no leg to stand on. You can't put a bright face on it, and you can't convince me that you're just an innocent, idealistic advertising executive who's speaking out for the people with integrity.
If it is your job to trick me into buying something, you don't have any integrity.
I know what a reticle is. I don't know what a "receticle" is. Is that a cross between a reticle and a testicle? Because if it is, I don't want to know about it.
Then you have to support all the crappy hardware that's manufactured after 1/1/2006.
This is not a soluble problem. Apple cannot maintain its reputation for a decent computing experience and also support the crap hardware people seem to like buying.
Because with Steam, I have to ask the server every time I want to play Half Life 2. Which doesn't work very well when the hamsters in the server are dead.
With iTMS, I push "Play" on my iPod and it works fine.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a superb counterexample. Gold star!
I still don't think that a wartime economy is applicable to modern energy production, but I absolutely agree: The US economy in WW2 was centrally controlled, and worked more or less as designed.
Betcha couldn't sustain it, though...
Apple opts not to license the secured WMA that other music stores use. They also have not yet opted to license FairPlay to other people. However, they have taken no action whatsoever to force labels to do exclusive deals with iTunes.
They've engaged in exactly zero predatory and/or anticompetitive licensing behavior.
It's silly to compare the Apple monopoly to the Microsoft monopoly. All you have to do to not buy Apple stuff, is not buy Apple stuff. You can still do whatever you want. That's becoming more true of Microsoft's monopoly (their grip is weakening), but that has not always been the case.
Apple HAS done absolutely nothing, except decide not to accomodate Real. Apple has no incentive, nor desire, to accomodate Real. Why should they?
Real might have a leg to stand on if they even bothered to make their service available to Mac users.
...or Apple may just completely ignore them, like the totally irrelevant player Real has always tried to pretend like it's not.
Lots of things "may" happen. Get back to me when something DOES happen.
Who are you arguing with, exactly?
I really like the way you posted your ad hominem attack anonymously. That really doesn't do much for my opinion of your integrity.
You go on with your business model. Insofar as it requires my cooperation, it will fail.
I wouldn't presume to impugn the value judgements you make on what is a good use of your time and political savvy. It's none of my affair. I've managed to be a science fiction fan my entire life without associating with a club. You like associating with a club. Good for you. Good for me. Freedom is cool.
They have a right to try, although I reserve the right to be annoyed when they do. If their business model depends on my cooperation, it's doomed to failure.
Yep. We should definitely medicate those people whose worldview differs from ours. Conform or die!
I wonder (I know, this is going to blow your mind) if you, perhaps, have a different set of priorities than some other people. Some people might not share your priority structure. Some people might think that your priority structure is profoundly unsuitable for them.
Call me crazy.
What is your example of a functioning centrally controlled economy?
Any number that gets pulled out of any ass will almost always be the wrong number for most scenarios. That's why there's an energy market. Enron debacle aside, supply and demand seem to do a good job of pricing energy without any ass-pulling.
Uh, OK, so you're an alpha geek. Want a cookie or something? You managed to shoot the political rapids of a science fiction fan club. Good for you!
What's important to you isn't important to me, and vice versa. Take a deep breath, you'll live better.
Oh, I'm sorry. I took you for an industry shill, and you're actually just a wannabee drone.
Fair enough. Enjoy your life. Hope you never encounter anything that would encourage you to stand on principle...that'd be unrealistic, right?
I am dealing with it, thanks. Adblock works great. I'm not getting much in the way of spam. I've got a TiVo, and if the ads on that get any more intrusive, building an HTPC is becoming an ever more wife-friendly proposition. I've got GreenCine for movies, and some of my favorite magazines don't have ads in them. I'm making your advertisements progressively less intrusive and more irrelevant. Target all you want: I will still not tolerate your crap.
So I'm doing just fine getting along in the world with fewer advertisements.
I don't care about what the advertisers think. I don't want them to be part of my life, ever.
You seem to be arguing that targetted advertising is going to be the thing that makes advertising work better. I want advertising to stop completely. Our viewpoints are not compatible.
"You" is a collective term, as in "You members of the esteemed profession of advertisers".
My hope is that "you" will leave me the fuck alone. Where's THAT in your foolproof master advertising plan?
No, that is one example of manipulative, dishonest advertising.
Google is one advertiser that does an awfully good job of not pissing me off. They are about the only one I've ever seen.
You don't WANT me to compare two products. You want me to buy YOUR product. I want to make a decision based on MY needs, of which you are completely ignorant, and I want to keep you that way.
Why do sugary breakfast cereals advertise during cartoons? Kids don't buy sugary breakfast cereals. Kids, who have been convinced that sugary breakfast cereals are a good idea, ask their parents to buy sugary breakfast cereals. If the parent says "No", the child becomes intolerable. How do I know? Because I was such a child.
What possible non-manipulative reason can you have to advertise to people who can't buy your product?
You proceed from the assumption that I will ever punch the monkey for any reason, they just have to find a good enough reason.
I don't want to punch the monkey. I want to punch the person who thought of punching the monkey in the first place.
How nice for you to give me credit. It's almost like you're trying to convince me that my opinion is not correct. You're taking your work home with you.
Explain to me the Pepsi Challenge. Cold, fresh Pepsi vs. warm, flat Coke? Yeah, that's not manipulative and dishonest, is it? I'd be very happy if advertisers stopped trying to convince me that the other brand of soda really does taste better. I know what I like, you don't, leave me the hell alone.
Where do I go when I'm looking for something? I go to Pricewatch. I go to Froogle. I actively avoid places that try to convince me that their brand will get me whiter teeth and fresher breath.
Comparison shopping is totally antithetical to the profession of advertising.
I have no issue whatsoever with you providing me information when I ask for it. I have a big issue with you (note that this is a collective "you", as in "you advertiser") try to reprogram my (hypothetical) kids to eat sugary breakfast cereal.
And don't even try to tell me that that's not manipulative.
I don't want your better results.
I don't want to BE your better result.
I don't like any ads at all. I think your entire business is founded on manipulation, deception, and brain washing. You have no leg to stand on. You can't put a bright face on it, and you can't convince me that you're just an innocent, idealistic advertising executive who's speaking out for the people with integrity.
If it is your job to trick me into buying something, you don't have any integrity.
I call bullshit. Where are people getting arrested for physical discipline of their children?
And here I thought it was aimed at people who liked Gangsta rap in the late 80's early 90's, when the game is set. People who are my age. (31)
But hey, I'm sure you could fabricate any sort of rationale that makes your point for you.
I never liked rap very much, but I thought GTA:SA was a lot of fun.
I know what a reticle is. I don't know what a "receticle" is. Is that a cross between a reticle and a testicle? Because if it is, I don't want to know about it.
What the hell is a receticle?
Then you have to support all the crappy hardware that's manufactured after 1/1/2006.
This is not a soluble problem. Apple cannot maintain its reputation for a decent computing experience and also support the crap hardware people seem to like buying.
Because with Steam, I have to ask the server every time I want to play Half Life 2. Which doesn't work very well when the hamsters in the server are dead.
With iTMS, I push "Play" on my iPod and it works fine.