Sorry, but to me DrudgeReport's link Breibart is more honest that Slashdot. Why you decide to declare negative spin as "right" boggles me. So if the truth hurts its only because of political leaning? I prefer conservative instead of labeling things as "right" and liberal instead of "left".
Regardless of the the leanings of a sight which is doing more of a disservice to public perception? The truth isn't always roses and as such hiding that fact can actually make matters worse. To correct behavior you don't like you don't hide it. You don't mask it. You acknowledge it and then you take steps to combat it.
Perhaps more people will now download and PAY for the album out of sense of obligation or guilt.
Sorry, your two cents aren't worth the view you propose because you simply reinforce the idea some of us have, which is people who bemoan the seeing thet truth labeled as spin/fud and worse throw in political views as some how a irrefutable fact to support such a view as simply another excuse and another sign of whats wrong with our current society.
The fact is, people want something for nothing but hate to be called out on it.
and I think too many people confuse what is available there with progress and offerings being created by "Big Pharma" corporations.
I am VERY VERY HAPPY with the state of medical research from private companies we have in the states. Just in my short forty years on this world I can see a significant increase in my chances to survive ailments and injuries that would have doomed me before.
I think old Mr. Intel is just jumping on a PC bandwagon which will only lead us to socialized medicine and lack of progress. How can we attack an industry which is doing so much good? The burden of lawsuits is what slows acceptance. We no longer as a people accept the fact we are different even in the face of complex chemical compounds. Its downright dangerous to release new drugs because SOMEONE is going to react badly.
No, I am more than happy. My mother was diagnosed with diabetes thirty years ago and the steady progress made in that field alone has allowed her to live a normal and happy life without all the scary side effects people used to have (loss of vision, limbs, etc). Hell the drugs they have today have saved her from near death where before none of this was readily available.
Could the industry do more? Sure, but GET GOVERNMENT OFF ITS BACK. Just like the damn laws that raise private insurance to high levels - the federal government holds back this industry a lot - through laws that prevent insuring across state lines to suit happy federal courts that lawyers can cherry pick as there is no federal protection for companies who release drugs the feds declare safe.
We are entering a period where many drugs will be gene driven, even customized for the individual, and that is going to require a lot of cooperation between government and corporation, something that isn't there as government seems at times inherently hostile to corporations, especially those health care related
The changed the game significantly from BETA
on
Tabula Rasa Goes Live
·
· Score: 2, Informative
From BETA to live and most of the game changed.
Besides the obvious "all this crap is broken" cries...
they made grouping almost a must for many activities. Instances? All mobs are "elite" now... and you better hope you can actually do the quest provided you can find people - many needed drops are not there.
Most landscape mobs had their difficulty moved up significantly. Basically, what people were enjoying in BETA for difficulty level and need to group isn't there anymore.
Error or on purpose? Who knows, but I know a lot of pissed of TR fans... some rapidy approaching "former"
Still your right, the numbers chosen are not published, but with the "ball" method being used at many lotteries how would knowing what they choose really affect your chance of winning anything substantial?
One thing I noticed was that the more times a user has to enter their security password the more likely they become complacent and assume that any install is going to require it and any install that occurs is going to be safe.
Basically what sunk later attempts by Microsoft to patch security. As soon as they added "warnings" (aka popups) people got into the habit of clicking yes and thereby undoing any chance the programmers had at protecting users from being stupid. You can even blame this behavior on EULA's which require click through - people do this automatically.
As the Mac gains in popularity the numbers of careless people will go up and infections like this will occur more often. The key is finding a way to train the user that its WRONG. That or finding a way to have the OS run objects installed in some form of "safe mode" for a time without letting the user in on it.
I have had friends stationed on Destroyers and they will tell you that in stormy weather it is no fun. Even at lengths approaching six hundred feet the high seas can be a rough place. Its a matter of displacement and the ability to have enough length to not go up and down waves. The longer ships fare much better. I have sailed on a thirty foot sailboat out of Savannah and you can take a pounding when it gets a bit choppy.
All I can assume is that these machines will designed to ignore the wash. Without a human crew there isn't the fear factor built in. At that size it probably takes a robot to handle what the weather can do to it. Fortunately craft like this can be totally sealed off so as handle gulfing (when you plow into a wave and essentially go under) and I wouldn't doubt that being flipped over is taken into account.
Without outside supervision their horizon would be very limited simply because of their lack of height, making any meaningful interdiction a pain in the ass without some guidance to ships that are suspicious. I doubt they will be see outside of coastal areas. Anything in the open sea is going to require a something akin to a submersible or near clone of a real surface ship. No, these look like interdiction for speedboats and inflatables favored by "terrorist"
Apple isn't going to break into corporate computing in any real sense until corporations see a good ROI. With fixed, and pricey hardware, that is not going to happen either. Apple is already attracting the attention of governments across the world because of the popularity of their new phone and ipod - and its not been good attention either. They are quickly reaching the point of not being able to have their cake and eat it too.
I think Apple would be very well served with a box that allows "controlled" customization. By that I mean "certified expansion cards" and a configuration friendlier to business. This would mean more cooperation with various push type technologies and even more integration into the Windows based network world. the headless mac I envision would also be used to pull the game boys off their soapbox - a mac with dual core/quad core processors able to use a certified top line Nvidia/ATI card would go a long way to giving mac fans a club. Now these people can either shit or get off the pot.
Back to the corporate world - the simple machine would allow for service by the corp's PC tech people - allowing swapping of bad drives or upgrading them with ease. The mini and iMac don't fit the bill. They "can" use some off the shelf components but are not designed to be serviced by regular techs.
It isn't about offering OS X for the PC - its offering OS X on a platform that is more "friendly" to the needs of business and at the same time gamers. The fact that Leopard makes installing Windows so easy is the icing on the cake
Sorry, but its cheesey. I am looking forward to many of the changes involved, but some of the UI changes leave me scratching my head.
Time Machine - Disk Eater - be careful, when manipulating large files (movie/picture) and making only small changes it backs it all up. This is nice to get previous versions exactly as they were but the side effect is a lot of disk can be eaten.
Oh, do you have a lot of email? Some packages (not naming) store it all in one file, and as such guess what happens when your TM timer is up?
Yet what we are offered today is so much better and it does 3d as well!
I upgrade every other cycle, this means my buying period is up. Yes I jumped. I will pass down my previous generation card to some who do not spend much on their computers.
Compared to other expenses in life these things are cheap. People will pay more for their internet across the year and not bat an eye, some do it for cell, and others do it for TV!
Imagine, paying $400 a year to use a phone!!! Really, one of my grand parents reasons for not buying a cell phone!
It all works out to what you need money for. For me, $250 or so is a non-issue during a monthly period.
I refuse to see todays cards as overpriced or expensive. As before, I remember the days of 200+ 2d cards and 299 VOODOO cards!
Pixar boasted we would not see their animation on desktops... but we have and gone beyond in some cases.
Let Apple separate the dummies from their money. You should not legislate to prevent that as there are so many other phones and programs available. Nothing ceases to amaze me how riled up geeks get when what THEY want is limited but not when what OTHERS want is.
Yeah we need government regulation in certain cases, but this isn't one of them. Funny thing is, it may be that Apple changes the cell phone industry, just not in a way profitable to Apple. In fact Apple with their lock-ins (ipod, iphone, etc) may just get more scrutiny than they want. Being popular isn't always a good thing
The iPhone is such a high profile product that with all the people harping about cell phone contracts and such, the costs to exit them, the other terms, that Congress has taken notice.
So the iPhone may lead to a better cell phone market, however it may not be good for Apple as it will remove this type of contract which serves them so well
enforce than it makes them? I understand they are protecting the rights of distributors and their rights across borders. Hell there could be some stupid trade laws that actually cause fines to be applied to sales across certain borders. Still I wonder if the enforcement costs outweigh the profit per sale, not counting lost customers.
Still, as before, I am amazed at how much people will go out of their way to save twenty bucks or so while sporting 2K gaming machines.
I have no problem with GPS tracking in cars
on
Technology as Tattletale
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
when it comes to parents (the owners of the cars) who lend them to their children. I think every parent has the right to know where their car and child is. Giving a car to a child is a big hand over of responsbility but it does not end that responsibility for the parent. The child (adult for some) is entrusted to behave as the parent instructs and operation of a car outside of direct parental supervision is not a license to be a hooligan. Once the child becomes an adult by law or moves out the use of such a device should end.
We lose too many children every year to auto accidents and perhaps knowing they are being watched over will save a few from fruitless loss. It could do very well to protect them as well from actions outside of their control - giving responders guidance to where they are in an emergency.
Proof of concept. Perhaps one or more groups got the go ahead to pursue a light weight OS that is more portable than current offerings (CE, Xp, and Vista). Showing it to work on the OLPC would be just great for press time.
This would be the precusror to more Windows named systems with a new common core. Not his first generation attempt but aiming more at the types of devices which MS expects to take off in the upcoming nations of the world.
Personally I think the OLPC is a waste of money, more should be dedicated to infrastructure and cheap communication... (as in, cell phone access to stuff relevant to those who need it, reserve computers for classroom presentation to students.. not something to haul home and evetuanlly see on the side of the road)
if you mean, sponsored as in, assign an amount of money to competeing private organizations (corporate or otherwise) with the full understanding everyone benefits then yes. However if you mean just government funded grants to orgranizations run by the government - then no.
Government only innovates when it HAS too. In other words, if there is no deadline (emphasis on the dead part) these types of things go on forver and evolve into useless side items that burn up tax dollars and never complete the original goal. They become line items by which Congress can divy up dollars to campaign donaters.
No, take the money and offer it as a prize. First two companies to do X get Y. Very much NASA's new programs which are related to how the X-prize went.
The last thing we need is even more government involvement. It already stifles innovation.
Reading some of the various "deal" forums it amazes me what people will go through to save a few dollars, yet turn around and brag about their $300 cases, water cooling, and thousand dollars worth of video cards.
Just who do you think explores the planets? The United States isn't losing space superiority, the US's focus is different. The US and Russians have been there, done that, all before. Now is the time for the new kids on the block to earn their wings. Thank goodness they are focusing on national pride through space exploration rather than warfare.
The US has plans to go back to the moon but support for the "current" Adminstration doing it is not high. We finally have seen the Shuttle given a real end of life which honestly, to me at least, was holding back the whole manned project in the first place. KISS.
Yeah there is a danger we could lose our superiority, but now that we have challengers that is less likely.
The requirement should be, create a back up copy for the end user which cannot be used; easily; by anyone else. Granted many companies won't like that either but it may be easier to keep it off their radar if the system truly doesn't make it easy to just copy and distribute paid content.
The problem comes down to the fact that the "innocent" users are being lumped together with the abusers. Yet who do people bitch about? The company being negatively affected. Do you know people who have pirated games? Have you told them to take a hike? If not, why?
the problem for the elites who like to rain down proclamations on us ignorant people its not where they want it to be focused. small business drives America and that is where a lot of this wealth is concentrated. Also, how do you consider ownership of companies that are publically traded? Perhaps we should check then who owns what stock in what station or paper? Many were owned by families as their ancestors started them, worked hard to sustain them.
the thing they miss is that even if minorities (women and non-whites) owned something like one of these media outlets does not mean the focus of said outlet would change. No, if they were in it to make money they would cater to the largest audience they could find. Some will go the route of catering but the majority would aim for the big pie. We have many many small newspapers that cater to groups, some very limited geographically and others who cover regions.
We don't need the government to engineer media, we need to let it evolve. The controlling factor will be OUR choosing who we get our information from. The internet opened so many possibilities that restricting the old media will only sink them quicker for the current generations
Because suddenly there would not be as many channels that I would be able to choose from. With newspapers it no longer matters as most cities have seen the smaller papers taken over or just gone out of business. In some cities the take over was the only way for the staff an opinions they held to survive. They would have had to find jobs elsewhere if they could from an ever dwindling supply of jobs.
I know its currently the belief of many that media conglomerates are destroying radio but in my city we have more choices than ever because these same conglomerates are trying to cover all the bases. So instead of the number of stations on my dial decreasing with the recent buyouts I have many many more. Hell I don't have enough buttons on my car radio (18) to get them all now.
We have multiple top40 stations; which format seems to bring angst here; where we had only two real ones before, we got our album rock station back as the conglomerate who bought it already had a station or two of the format it had before. We have too many easy listening stations but funny thing is, they are mostly independant or owned by small media companies and they took the same bet for income.
No, restricting ownership is just as bad as unrestricted ownership. I think cross ownership is warranted as some industries are drying up and they should have new means of getting their particular view out.
For the most part I have seen only two reasons given to restrict ownership, first because so many here hate top40 and prefer off the wall bands that don't get much play outside of college stations - if there, and talk radio. Any attempt to limit something you don't like that isn't illegal is just wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but to me DrudgeReport's link Breibart is more honest that Slashdot. Why you decide to declare negative spin as "right" boggles me. So if the truth hurts its only because of political leaning? I prefer conservative instead of labeling things as "right" and liberal instead of "left".
Regardless of the the leanings of a sight which is doing more of a disservice to public perception? The truth isn't always roses and as such hiding that fact can actually make matters worse. To correct behavior you don't like you don't hide it. You don't mask it. You acknowledge it and then you take steps to combat it.
Perhaps more people will now download and PAY for the album out of sense of obligation or guilt.
Sorry, your two cents aren't worth the view you propose because you simply reinforce the idea some of us have, which is people who bemoan the seeing thet truth labeled as spin/fud and worse throw in political views as some how a irrefutable fact to support such a view as simply another excuse and another sign of whats wrong with our current society.
The fact is, people want something for nothing but hate to be called out on it.
and I think too many people confuse what is available there with progress and offerings being created by "Big Pharma" corporations.
I am VERY VERY HAPPY with the state of medical research from private companies we have in the states. Just in my short forty years on this world I can see a significant increase in my chances to survive ailments and injuries that would have doomed me before.
I think old Mr. Intel is just jumping on a PC bandwagon which will only lead us to socialized medicine and lack of progress. How can we attack an industry which is doing so much good? The burden of lawsuits is what slows acceptance. We no longer as a people accept the fact we are different even in the face of complex chemical compounds. Its downright dangerous to release new drugs because SOMEONE is going to react badly.
No, I am more than happy. My mother was diagnosed with diabetes thirty years ago and the steady progress made in that field alone has allowed her to live a normal and happy life without all the scary side effects people used to have (loss of vision, limbs, etc). Hell the drugs they have today have saved her from near death where before none of this was readily available.
Could the industry do more? Sure, but GET GOVERNMENT OFF ITS BACK. Just like the damn laws that raise private insurance to high levels - the federal government holds back this industry a lot - through laws that prevent insuring across state lines to suit happy federal courts that lawyers can cherry pick as there is no federal protection for companies who release drugs the feds declare safe.
We are entering a period where many drugs will be gene driven, even customized for the individual, and that is going to require a lot of cooperation between government and corporation, something that isn't there as government seems at times inherently hostile to corporations, especially those health care related
From BETA to live and most of the game changed.
Besides the obvious "all this crap is broken" cries...
they made grouping almost a must for many activities. Instances? All mobs are "elite" now... and you better hope you can actually do the quest provided you can find people - many needed drops are not there.
Most landscape mobs had their difficulty moved up significantly. Basically, what people were enjoying in BETA for difficulty level and need to group isn't there anymore.
Error or on purpose? Who knows, but I know a lot of pissed of TR fans... some rapidy approaching "former"
Remember the story about a larger than usual number of people having a winning ticket?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/01/national/main684584.shtml
Still your right, the numbers chosen are not published, but with the "ball" method being used at many lotteries how would knowing what they choose really affect your chance of winning anything substantial?
One thing I noticed was that the more times a user has to enter their security password the more likely they become complacent and assume that any install is going to require it and any install that occurs is going to be safe.
Basically what sunk later attempts by Microsoft to patch security. As soon as they added "warnings" (aka popups) people got into the habit of clicking yes and thereby undoing any chance the programmers had at protecting users from being stupid. You can even blame this behavior on EULA's which require click through - people do this automatically.
As the Mac gains in popularity the numbers of careless people will go up and infections like this will occur more often. The key is finding a way to train the user that its WRONG. That or finding a way to have the OS run objects installed in some form of "safe mode" for a time without letting the user in on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everex
Their site http://www.everex.com/
review of a $600 version from the awhile ago http://www.laptopmag.com/Review/Everex-StepNote-LM7WE.htm
I haven't found many reliability mentions... but you can dig more yourself
$200 is practically chump change for many
Face it, there are tools out there that make it insanely easy to provide content to the majority of users.
Most likely they went with what some consultant said, to get up and running as quickly as possible with the minimum in costs.
Now, what would it take to come up with something in Linux that can read this data? Is it even remotely possible?
I have had friends stationed on Destroyers and they will tell you that in stormy weather it is no fun. Even at lengths approaching six hundred feet the high seas can be a rough place. Its a matter of displacement and the ability to have enough length to not go up and down waves. The longer ships fare much better. I have sailed on a thirty foot sailboat out of Savannah and you can take a pounding when it gets a bit choppy.
All I can assume is that these machines will designed to ignore the wash. Without a human crew there isn't the fear factor built in. At that size it probably takes a robot to handle what the weather can do to it. Fortunately craft like this can be totally sealed off so as handle gulfing (when you plow into a wave and essentially go under) and I wouldn't doubt that being flipped over is taken into account.
Without outside supervision their horizon would be very limited simply because of their lack of height, making any meaningful interdiction a pain in the ass without some guidance to ships that are suspicious. I doubt they will be see outside of coastal areas. Anything in the open sea is going to require a something akin to a submersible or near clone of a real surface ship. No, these look like interdiction for speedboats and inflatables favored by "terrorist"
It works both ways.
Apple isn't going to break into corporate computing in any real sense until corporations see a good ROI. With fixed, and pricey hardware, that is not going to happen either. Apple is already attracting the attention of governments across the world because of the popularity of their new phone and ipod - and its not been good attention either. They are quickly reaching the point of not being able to have their cake and eat it too.
I think Apple would be very well served with a box that allows "controlled" customization. By that I mean "certified expansion cards" and a configuration friendlier to business. This would mean more cooperation with various push type technologies and even more integration into the Windows based network world. the headless mac I envision would also be used to pull the game boys off their soapbox - a mac with dual core/quad core processors able to use a certified top line Nvidia/ATI card would go a long way to giving mac fans a club. Now these people can either shit or get off the pot.
Back to the corporate world - the simple machine would allow for service by the corp's PC tech people - allowing swapping of bad drives or upgrading them with ease. The mini and iMac don't fit the bill. They "can" use some off the shelf components but are not designed to be serviced by regular techs.
It isn't about offering OS X for the PC - its offering OS X on a platform that is more "friendly" to the needs of business and at the same time gamers. The fact that Leopard makes installing Windows so easy is the icing on the cake
Sorry, but its cheesey. I am looking forward to many of the changes involved, but some of the UI changes leave me scratching my head.
Time Machine - Disk Eater - be careful, when manipulating large files (movie/picture) and making only small changes it backs it all up. This is nice to get previous versions exactly as they were but the side effect is a lot of disk can be eaten.
Oh, do you have a lot of email? Some packages (not naming) store it all in one file, and as such guess what happens when your TM timer is up?
I so like the new preview functionality...
the rest of us listen to music.
At least thats what I remember from discussing audio equipment among friends.
I remember paying more for 2d cards.
Yet what we are offered today is so much better and it does 3d as well!
I upgrade every other cycle, this means my buying period is up. Yes I jumped. I will pass down my previous generation card to some who do not spend much on their computers.
Compared to other expenses in life these things are cheap. People will pay more for their internet across the year and not bat an eye, some do it for cell, and others do it for TV!
Imagine, paying $400 a year to use a phone!!! Really, one of my grand parents reasons for not buying a cell phone!
It all works out to what you need money for. For me, $250 or so is a non-issue during a monthly period.
I refuse to see todays cards as overpriced or expensive. As before, I remember the days of 200+ 2d cards and 299 VOODOO cards!
Pixar boasted we would not see their animation on desktops... but we have and gone beyond in some cases.
who cares about carrier lock in? Exclusivity?
ITS A DAMN PHONE.
Let Apple separate the dummies from their money. You should not legislate to prevent that as there are so many other phones and programs available. Nothing ceases to amaze me how riled up geeks get when what THEY want is limited but not when what OTHERS want is.
Yeah we need government regulation in certain cases, but this isn't one of them. Funny thing is, it may be that Apple changes the cell phone industry, just not in a way profitable to Apple. In fact Apple with their lock-ins (ipod, iphone, etc) may just get more scrutiny than they want. Being popular isn't always a good thing
but not in the manner they were hoping.
The iPhone is such a high profile product that with all the people harping about cell phone contracts and such, the costs to exit them, the other terms, that Congress has taken notice.
So the iPhone may lead to a better cell phone market, however it may not be good for Apple as it will remove this type of contract which serves them so well
try going outside for a change.
enforce than it makes them? I understand they are protecting the rights of distributors and their rights across borders. Hell there could be some stupid trade laws that actually cause fines to be applied to sales across certain borders. Still I wonder if the enforcement costs outweigh the profit per sale, not counting lost customers.
Still, as before, I am amazed at how much people will go out of their way to save twenty bucks or so while sporting 2K gaming machines.
when it comes to parents (the owners of the cars) who lend them to their children. I think every parent has the right to know where their car and child is. Giving a car to a child is a big hand over of responsbility but it does not end that responsibility for the parent. The child (adult for some) is entrusted to behave as the parent instructs and operation of a car outside of direct parental supervision is not a license to be a hooligan. Once the child becomes an adult by law or moves out the use of such a device should end.
We lose too many children every year to auto accidents and perhaps knowing they are being watched over will save a few from fruitless loss. It could do very well to protect them as well from actions outside of their control - giving responders guidance to where they are in an emergency.
Proof of concept. Perhaps one or more groups got the go ahead to pursue a light weight OS that is more portable than current offerings (CE, Xp, and Vista). Showing it to work on the OLPC would be just great for press time.
This would be the precusror to more Windows named systems with a new common core. Not his first generation attempt but aiming more at the types of devices which MS expects to take off in the upcoming nations of the world.
Personally I think the OLPC is a waste of money, more should be dedicated to infrastructure and cheap communication... (as in, cell phone access to stuff relevant to those who need it, reserve computers for classroom presentation to students.. not something to haul home and evetuanlly see on the side of the road)
if you mean, sponsored as in, assign an amount of money to competeing private organizations (corporate or otherwise) with the full understanding everyone benefits then yes. However if you mean just government funded grants to orgranizations run by the government - then no.
Government only innovates when it HAS too. In other words, if there is no deadline (emphasis on the dead part) these types of things go on forver and evolve into useless side items that burn up tax dollars and never complete the original goal. They become line items by which Congress can divy up dollars to campaign donaters.
No, take the money and offer it as a prize. First two companies to do X get Y. Very much NASA's new programs which are related to how the X-prize went.
The last thing we need is even more government involvement. It already stifles innovation.
to protect deals with distributors.
Reading some of the various "deal" forums it amazes me what people will go through to save a few dollars, yet turn around and brag about their $300 cases, water cooling, and thousand dollars worth of video cards.
Just who do you think explores the planets? The United States isn't losing space superiority, the US's focus is different. The US and Russians have been there, done that, all before. Now is the time for the new kids on the block to earn their wings. Thank goodness they are focusing on national pride through space exploration rather than warfare.
The US has plans to go back to the moon but support for the "current" Adminstration doing it is not high. We finally have seen the Shuttle given a real end of life which honestly, to me at least, was holding back the whole manned project in the first place. KISS.
Yeah there is a danger we could lose our superiority, but now that we have challengers that is less likely.
you would be right. Why do people defeat themselves before ever trying?
The requirement should be, create a back up copy for the end user which cannot be used; easily; by anyone else. Granted many companies won't like that either but it may be easier to keep it off their radar if the system truly doesn't make it easy to just copy and distribute paid content.
The problem comes down to the fact that the "innocent" users are being lumped together with the abusers. Yet who do people bitch about? The company being negatively affected. Do you know people who have pirated games? Have you told them to take a hike? If not, why?
the problem for the elites who like to rain down proclamations on us ignorant people its not where they want it to be focused. small business drives America and that is where a lot of this wealth is concentrated. Also, how do you consider ownership of companies that are publically traded? Perhaps we should check then who owns what stock in what station or paper? Many were owned by families as their ancestors started them, worked hard to sustain them.
the thing they miss is that even if minorities (women and non-whites) owned something like one of these media outlets does not mean the focus of said outlet would change. No, if they were in it to make money they would cater to the largest audience they could find. Some will go the route of catering but the majority would aim for the big pie. We have many many small newspapers that cater to groups, some very limited geographically and others who cover regions.
We don't need the government to engineer media, we need to let it evolve. The controlling factor will be OUR choosing who we get our information from. The internet opened so many possibilities that restricting the old media will only sink them quicker for the current generations
Because suddenly there would not be as many channels that I would be able to choose from. With newspapers it no longer matters as most cities have seen the smaller papers taken over or just gone out of business. In some cities the take over was the only way for the staff an opinions they held to survive. They would have had to find jobs elsewhere if they could from an ever dwindling supply of jobs.
I know its currently the belief of many that media conglomerates are destroying radio but in my city we have more choices than ever because these same conglomerates are trying to cover all the bases. So instead of the number of stations on my dial decreasing with the recent buyouts I have many many more. Hell I don't have enough buttons on my car radio (18) to get them all now.
We have multiple top40 stations; which format seems to bring angst here; where we had only two real ones before, we got our album rock station back as the conglomerate who bought it already had a station or two of the format it had before. We have too many easy listening stations but funny thing is, they are mostly independant or owned by small media companies and they took the same bet for income.
No, restricting ownership is just as bad as unrestricted ownership. I think cross ownership is warranted as some industries are drying up and they should have new means of getting their particular view out.
For the most part I have seen only two reasons given to restrict ownership, first because so many here hate top40 and prefer off the wall bands that don't get much play outside of college stations - if there, and talk radio. Any attempt to limit something you don't like that isn't illegal is just wrong.