Almost every single band out there makes most of their money from touring, not album sales. The reason they sell albums? To drum up demand for tours. The money from the album sales goes to the RIAA and distribution, etc. This remains true for everyone from the Backstreet Boys to the garage bands. For most artists, free trade of MP3's etc would be a boon since it would get more interest in their tours (if they're any good, of course).
at least a judge is trained in the field and *usually* doesn't have a strong bias one way or another"
Ever seen Judge Judy? I hate that woman. Every time she comes on TV I want to reach through the screen and strangle her till her eyes pop out.
Or perhaps we should have "let the people decide"--of course, we did that once; it was called "election night" and it didn't work the first time around."
Actually, the decision was Al Gore by a decent margin. It's just the damn electoral college that gets in the way.
I don't remember the amendment that states that I have "the right to not be killed"...could you give me that passage again?
The Constitution simply outlines the powers and limitations of the federal goverment. The "right to not be killed" would only appear in the Constitution in the context of "the federal government is not allowed to kill people", or "murder is a federal crime, and shall be handled by the federal judicial system".
Of course, then the issue occurs, is abortion murder? Well, since there seems to be so much grey area involved (I think the great majority of people would agree with that statement), the only fair thing to do is to let the individual woman decide.
BTW, if you were truly motivated by the Constitution, then you'd have to say that the Federal Gov't has no say in the matter, and it's then up to the State and local gov't's to act if they wish. If they don't act, then the powers are reserved to the people.
A couple of weeks ago, my local paper (the Gainesville Sun) had an article on a judge who researched technical issues on his own time (sorry, the story does not seem to be online). ie., he consulted friends of his and read books on technical (or non-technical) subjects that he didn't understand. Well, to make a long story short, he's facing suspension and disbarrment. Why? Evidently, the judges are only supposed to listen to what is said in the courtroom-that is to be their sole source of information. The judge was previously warned about his behaivor, but continues to do it anyway.
Just thought it might be an interesting aside on the face of justice these days....
Well, with CD-R(W)'s, I never run out of space. As for checking through everything I got, that is indeed a problem with a 28.8 connection, since by the time I'm through downloading I've forgotten what it is! OTOH, I do have 5 CD's worth of files and utilities that I carry with me to every site I go to, and have more than once thanked God that I had them with me.
As for charging per computer or per person, I don't think that argument holds up either. I may use my 'Net connection a lot more than you do, and I can hide other computers on my network. Really, the only fair way is by-the-meg. Of course, nobody likes that idea, since we're all used to unlimited plans and knowing up-front what our costs are going to be. So, basically, the ISPs have 2 choices: go with by-the-meg charges and lose a good bit of their business, or stay with the unlimited plan-but be prepared to beef up infrastructure if everyone turns out to be like me. =)
Actually, McDonald's can ask/force anyone and everyone out of the order line by simply telling them to leave. It's called "No Trespassing", and as long as it's not based on race, sex, religion, or disabled status (protected classes here in the US) MickeyD's would be in the clear.
And MickeyD's is most certainly welcome to have protesters protesting, for example, the election of George W. Bush assemble in the parking lot, behind their counter, or in their dining room. And, of course, they can tell the Al Gore protesters to beat it when they show up. All perfectly within their rights as a private business.
"Unless you have more than two arms, you can only do so many things on the internet at once, even if you own 1000 computers
I don't know about you, but I figured out the benefits of multi-tasking long ago. True, I can only do so many things at once on the internet, but it's a helluva lot of things.
I can download 5-10+ files at once, while using a download manager to queue the rest. I can use Napster to download/upload songs (can have alot of simultaneous downloads going there pretty easily). I can be running ICQ/AIM/whatever, while browsing/.. All the while, of course, my email client is checking my 5 mail servers for new mail. And, of course, I'm logged into my company's VPN so that I can check my email on the LAN and pull up those all-so important files on the network drives. And, hell, while I'm at it, why don't I go ahead and fire up my FTP/Web/Mail/NNTP/HTTP-Tunnel servers for all the folks out in 'net land to use (which include a streaming media server, BTW). Oh, and of course I'm scanning/downloading binaries from alt.binaries (cracks, hacks, and warez, of course;)).
And, except for the web browsing, I can be sitting on my couch watching TV or sleeping or not even be home while this is all going on.
Of course, I never get to do all of this because I have a 28.8k dial-up connection. And, though my company has underutilized T-3's, IS tends to be a little unforgiving about servers and large/multiple downloads.
But, if I had the bandwidth at home, believe me, I'd use it. I've often left a dial-up connection connected for 2-3 days straight on download marathons.
There is a fallacy involved, but not the one you mentioned. Simply put, timesaving devices really do save time. On that one particular task.
Unfortunately, we find other tasks to occupy our time. End result? We're a helluva lot more productive than we were "even a few years ago." And therein lies the rub, we save time on each task, but as we save time in aggregate, we tend to take on more and more, which, of course, leaves us with less time.
Not to mention that you can't really even become self-sufficient, since you have to buy the property to live own. With property comes property taxes, which require money to pay.
Actually, this isn't that bad of an idea at all. As for the Brits gov't "stomp[ing] all over them", I suppose you feel the same way about speeding tickets here in the States, then? (Actually, I do...but it's a fact of life that they'll stay, so it's really not worth getting upset over).
Think about it, though. If the gov't and the cops really wanted to stop people from speeding, this would be the way to do it. If, as I believe, they actually want people to speed so they can give tickets and receive revenue, well, then this won't ever be implemented.
But, seeing as how it is believed to be "inherently dangerous" to speed (not that I believe so, I routinely do +10-20mph over posted limits because I feel that that's what I can personally handle...but, obviously, the greater part of our population does believe it is), I have absolutely no problem with a speed limiter. I've actually thought of this idea myself, though I don't know why GPS has to be involved. Simply place low-powered transmitters in speed limit signs, and have a receiver in the car. The reciever translates the signal and locks the governor to the set speed limit until it receives another signal (from a different speed limit sign) or a certain amount of time/distance has passed. If I was designing the thing, I would allow a small window between speed changes to allow for last minute passing maneuvers from a higher speed zone to a lower, and perhaps also a +5-10mph short-burst mode for passing situations. As for cracking the thing, go right ahead. But, just be warned, speeding in a radio-controlled zone in a governed car carries the normal speeding fine penalty, as well as a hefty fine if you disabled the thing. If it stops working, fine. You're still responsible for monitoring your speed ala the old rules.
And to the man who said that the gov't can't control his car, have you taken a look at current auto regulations? They already control your battery placement, lights, min and max horsepower, size, catalytic converter/exhaust system, noise levels, safety systems, steering wheel, brake and gas pedal, emergency braking system, brakes, tires, license, tag, emissions, insurance, etc, etc. So this would be nothing new.
Oh, and the easiest trial run would be to wire a highway with these things, and place transmitters at the exits to disable the governor after getting off the highway.
Well, actually, though it's impossible to "win", it is possible to "lose". If you take out too much in loans, and bankrupt the city, you're removed from office.
I used to work in FL for Convergys. AFAIK, there was the CMG group (which you mentioned) which billing ops for AT&T, Sprint (I think SprintPCS, but I could be wrong about that) and a handful of others.
Then, there was the IMG group which did outsourced tech support for various computer manafacturers and ISP's. Dell and Gateway were the 2 biggest accounts, I think. But they were working on landing NEC and Hewlett-Packard when I left. Don't know who the ISP's were, however.
BS-you could plainly see that was a TD just from the regular replays. Which, BTW, were infintely clearer and more informative than their EyeVision crap.
EyeVision looked like something spliced together with MGI PhotoSuite (not even VideoSuite, since it was so damn choppy), pr perhaps just an animated GIF. If you watch the replay on the Net with RealPlayer at 28.8kb or below, trust me, you're getting the full effect-it really was that crappy.
"If you didn't understand what somebody else was doing to your computer, would you trust them?"
I notice that uneducated computer users tend to trust people more when they don't know what you're doing. When they [think] they know what you're doing, they question every move.
You know, a blue box doesn't have to be blue. It was pretty common to use the Rat Shack dialers, replace the crystal, and make all different kinds of boxes. Usually, the * and/or # key were used, and sometimes you'd need to use both.
I, too, used to have a list of around 100+ colored boxes back in the 80's. Even then, half would not work due to more and more digital interfaces being used on the phone lines. Red boxing can still work on older payphones not owend by the Telco's, but it's pretty rare.
Of course, I never tried all the boxes, but there was one I wish I had tried. I believe it was coined the Black Box, and it regulated the voltage on the phone line so that the Telco never knew you picked it up. They saw it as just ringing, ringing, ringing.
Evidently, the way answered calls were/are detected is from a small dip in voltage whenever a phone is picked up. For instance (the voltages I'm pulling out of air, as my memory isn't that good!) a normal line would be 10v, when ringing it peaks to 12v, and when picked up it drops down to 8v. The Black Box would keep the line at a steady 12v when you picked up the phone.
Personally, I think Sony's EULA, and most EULA's in general, go too far in ascertaining "their" rights. They overstep their boundaries. And for this, they should be struck down. Over half of each EULA I encounter is things that should not be within the company's rights to request/demand compliance with.
Nobody is selling their accounts, or data, or anything else even remotely physical here! They are simply assigning their rights to others for compensation. There is nothing inherently illegal (unethical, immoral? perhaps...) about this. They are not profiting from "someone elses (sic) work w/o permission".
They received permission to play in the virtual world when they bought the game and paid their $10/month fee. They received rights to the virtual objects owned by their virtual character when they found/created them. They have the right to use that virtual character and his/her virtual objects. They, of course, do not actually own the characters, nor the objects. But, they do "own" the rights to them. Why shouldn't they be allowed to assign their rights to someone else?
As far as impinging on gameplay, that's a designer's problem. They need to come up with a way to reduce transfers, and to weed out campers. Just because it will "hurt the gameplay", or cause "Sony to lose money" is not a valid reason for trampling people's rights. Well, it shouldn't be a valid reason, but too often it is these days...
Math requires a different mindset than most other subjects. Most other subjects expect you to simply memorize and regurgitate. Math, OTOH, simply gives you the TOOLS to do something...it's up to you to figure out what to do with those tools, and how to do it. It's the difference between knowing what makes a good piece of furniture, versus knowing how to build a piece. You're only going to be able to build that furniture if you know how to use a lathe, milling machine, sander, saw, straight-edge, router, dowels, etc. Fall short in one of those areas, and you'll have a hard time with that furniture.
You really need to have a very thorough understanding of WHY something is the way it is, in order to be able to do math. And I think a lot of students are short-changed in the basics of math very early on. Without those foundations, it can indeed be very difficult to perform higher-level math.
Isn't that just a question of semantics then? If the cash rate is cheaper, then the credit card transaction is more expensive. Therefore, you pay more by credit card.
BTW, though, the retailer DOES lose a little money based on credit card transactions. At leats for a small-timer, ($0.30 + 2-5%) of the transaction is normal.
Consider yourself lucky. I just signed up for a new cellphone from Sprint PCS (2 actually). In the first month I called them 3 times to make sure I would be billed right at the end of the month. Long story short: they overbilled by about $150. I should have a bile for around $80. I've got one for $220+.
Now, if I would have had them on automatic withdrawal, they would've taken the $220 without me even knowing it until their little statement comes in the mail. Of course, in the meantime, I think I've got $150 more than I do, so I bounce a check or two. But, yeah, Sprint will refund me the money NEXT FSCKING MONTH! Can we say interest free loan to Sprint?
So, let's see. Now I'm out $150 for 1 month, assuming 12% interest, that's $15. (Of course, I don't earn 12% interest, I actually pay about 18.5% interest because of credit-card debt, but whatever...12% is easier to figure). Plus, let's say 2 bounced checks, that's $30x2=$60. Plus, let's not forget that whoever I wrote the checks to are going to charge me. So that's another $30x2=$60. And, let's say one of those checks was to my credit card company, now we have a late fee of $30.
$15+$60+$60+$30=$165. So, you see, really Sprint is giving me that money back at all. I'd been better off if I just gave them the extra $150.
Re:What about the KAL flight 007 tragedy?
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, just like a bomb/missile would never be accidentally fired on a Chinese embassy....oh, wait. I mean, uh, if that was to happen, then the country would own up to the error and take the necessary measures to determine what punishments are appropiate...Just so happens in this case that no punishments are appropiate...
Bottom line, folks...war is messy. And no matter how much money and technology they throw at their stupid liitle war-games, people still die. And innocent people die. And good people die. It just makes for better CNN viewing for the cluelless masses back home.
Slashdot Mirror
Almost every single band out there makes most of their money from touring, not album sales. The reason they sell albums? To drum up demand for tours. The money from the album sales goes to the RIAA and distribution, etc. This remains true for everyone from the Backstreet Boys to the garage bands. For most artists, free trade of MP3's etc would be a boon since it would get more interest in their tours (if they're any good, of course).
at least a judge is trained in the field and *usually* doesn't have a strong bias one way or another" Ever seen Judge Judy? I hate that woman. Every time she comes on TV I want to reach through the screen and strangle her till her eyes pop out.
Actually, the decision was Al Gore by a decent margin. It's just the damn electoral college that gets in the way.
The Constitution simply outlines the powers and limitations of the federal goverment. The "right to not be killed" would only appear in the Constitution in the context of "the federal government is not allowed to kill people", or "murder is a federal crime, and shall be handled by the federal judicial system".
Of course, then the issue occurs, is abortion murder? Well, since there seems to be so much grey area involved (I think the great majority of people would agree with that statement), the only fair thing to do is to let the individual woman decide.
BTW, if you were truly motivated by the Constitution, then you'd have to say that the Federal Gov't has no say in the matter, and it's then up to the State and local gov't's to act if they wish. If they don't act, then the powers are reserved to the people.
Just thought it might be an interesting aside on the face of justice these days....
As for charging per computer or per person, I don't think that argument holds up either. I may use my 'Net connection a lot more than you do, and I can hide other computers on my network. Really, the only fair way is by-the-meg. Of course, nobody likes that idea, since we're all used to unlimited plans and knowing up-front what our costs are going to be. So, basically, the ISPs have 2 choices: go with by-the-meg charges and lose a good bit of their business, or stay with the unlimited plan-but be prepared to beef up infrastructure if everyone turns out to be like me. =)
And MickeyD's is most certainly welcome to have protesters protesting, for example, the election of George W. Bush assemble in the parking lot, behind their counter, or in their dining room. And, of course, they can tell the Al Gore protesters to beat it when they show up. All perfectly within their rights as a private business.
I don't know about you, but I figured out the benefits of multi-tasking long ago. True, I can only do so many things at once on the internet, but it's a helluva lot of things.
I can download 5-10+ files at once, while using a download manager to queue the rest. I can use Napster to download/upload songs (can have alot of simultaneous downloads going there pretty easily). I can be running ICQ/AIM/whatever, while browsing /.. All the while, of course, my email client is checking my 5 mail servers for new mail. And, of course, I'm logged into my company's VPN so that I can check my email on the LAN and pull up those all-so important files on the network drives. And, hell, while I'm at it, why don't I go ahead and fire up my FTP/Web/Mail/NNTP/HTTP-Tunnel servers for all the folks out in 'net land to use (which include a streaming media server, BTW). Oh, and of course I'm scanning/downloading binaries from alt.binaries (cracks, hacks, and warez, of course ;)).
And, except for the web browsing, I can be sitting on my couch watching TV or sleeping or not even be home while this is all going on.
Of course, I never get to do all of this because I have a 28.8k dial-up connection. And, though my company has underutilized T-3's, IS tends to be a little unforgiving about servers and large/multiple downloads.
But, if I had the bandwidth at home, believe me, I'd use it. I've often left a dial-up connection connected for 2-3 days straight on download marathons.
Well, you couldn't really be there first, because it was my car. Therefore, I had to buy/borrow/steal it from somewhere first.
Unfortunately, we find other tasks to occupy our time. End result? We're a helluva lot more productive than we were "even a few years ago." And therein lies the rub, we save time on each task, but as we save time in aggregate, we tend to take on more and more, which, of course, leaves us with less time.
Not to mention that you can't really even become self-sufficient, since you have to buy the property to live own. With property comes property taxes, which require money to pay.
Think about it, though. If the gov't and the cops really wanted to stop people from speeding, this would be the way to do it. If, as I believe, they actually want people to speed so they can give tickets and receive revenue, well, then this won't ever be implemented.
But, seeing as how it is believed to be "inherently dangerous" to speed (not that I believe so, I routinely do +10-20mph over posted limits because I feel that that's what I can personally handle...but, obviously, the greater part of our population does believe it is), I have absolutely no problem with a speed limiter. I've actually thought of this idea myself, though I don't know why GPS has to be involved. Simply place low-powered transmitters in speed limit signs, and have a receiver in the car. The reciever translates the signal and locks the governor to the set speed limit until it receives another signal (from a different speed limit sign) or a certain amount of time/distance has passed. If I was designing the thing, I would allow a small window between speed changes to allow for last minute passing maneuvers from a higher speed zone to a lower, and perhaps also a +5-10mph short-burst mode for passing situations. As for cracking the thing, go right ahead. But, just be warned, speeding in a radio-controlled zone in a governed car carries the normal speeding fine penalty, as well as a hefty fine if you disabled the thing. If it stops working, fine. You're still responsible for monitoring your speed ala the old rules.
And to the man who said that the gov't can't control his car, have you taken a look at current auto regulations? They already control your battery placement, lights, min and max horsepower, size, catalytic converter/exhaust system, noise levels, safety systems, steering wheel, brake and gas pedal, emergency braking system, brakes, tires, license, tag, emissions, insurance, etc, etc. So this would be nothing new.
Oh, and the easiest trial run would be to wire a highway with these things, and place transmitters at the exits to disable the governor after getting off the highway.
Well, actually, though it's impossible to "win", it is possible to "lose". If you take out too much in loans, and bankrupt the city, you're removed from office.
Then, there was the IMG group which did outsourced tech support for various computer manafacturers and ISP's. Dell and Gateway were the 2 biggest accounts, I think. But they were working on landing NEC and Hewlett-Packard when I left. Don't know who the ISP's were, however.
EyeVision looked like something spliced together with MGI PhotoSuite (not even VideoSuite, since it was so damn choppy), pr perhaps just an animated GIF. If you watch the replay on the Net with RealPlayer at 28.8kb or below, trust me, you're getting the full effect-it really was that crappy.
I notice that uneducated computer users tend to trust people more when they don't know what you're doing. When they [think] they know what you're doing, they question every move.
I, too, used to have a list of around 100+ colored boxes back in the 80's. Even then, half would not work due to more and more digital interfaces being used on the phone lines. Red boxing can still work on older payphones not owend by the Telco's, but it's pretty rare.
Of course, I never tried all the boxes, but there was one I wish I had tried. I believe it was coined the Black Box, and it regulated the voltage on the phone line so that the Telco never knew you picked it up. They saw it as just ringing, ringing, ringing.
Evidently, the way answered calls were/are detected is from a small dip in voltage whenever a phone is picked up. For instance (the voltages I'm pulling out of air, as my memory isn't that good!) a normal line would be 10v, when ringing it peaks to 12v, and when picked up it drops down to 8v. The Black Box would keep the line at a steady 12v when you picked up the phone.
Personally, I think Sony's EULA, and most EULA's in general, go too far in ascertaining "their" rights. They overstep their boundaries. And for this, they should be struck down. Over half of each EULA I encounter is things that should not be within the company's rights to request/demand compliance with.
They received permission to play in the virtual world when they bought the game and paid their $10/month fee. They received rights to the virtual objects owned by their virtual character when they found/created them. They have the right to use that virtual character and his/her virtual objects. They, of course, do not actually own the characters, nor the objects. But, they do "own" the rights to them. Why shouldn't they be allowed to assign their rights to someone else?
As far as impinging on gameplay, that's a designer's problem. They need to come up with a way to reduce transfers, and to weed out campers. Just because it will "hurt the gameplay", or cause "Sony to lose money" is not a valid reason for trampling people's rights. Well, it shouldn't be a valid reason, but too often it is these days...
It's really not that difficult, you know.
That's the network install (full download...not all is used). The previous poster's 30MB was his customized bit...
Math requires a different mindset than most other subjects. Most other subjects expect you to simply memorize and regurgitate. Math, OTOH, simply gives you the TOOLS to do something...it's up to you to figure out what to do with those tools, and how to do it. It's the difference between knowing what makes a good piece of furniture, versus knowing how to build a piece. You're only going to be able to build that furniture if you know how to use a lathe, milling machine, sander, saw, straight-edge, router, dowels, etc. Fall short in one of those areas, and you'll have a hard time with that furniture. You really need to have a very thorough understanding of WHY something is the way it is, in order to be able to do math. And I think a lot of students are short-changed in the basics of math very early on. Without those foundations, it can indeed be very difficult to perform higher-level math.
BTW, though, the retailer DOES lose a little money based on credit card transactions. At leats for a small-timer, ($0.30 + 2-5%) of the transaction is normal.
Now, if I would have had them on automatic withdrawal, they would've taken the $220 without me even knowing it until their little statement comes in the mail. Of course, in the meantime, I think I've got $150 more than I do, so I bounce a check or two. But, yeah, Sprint will refund me the money NEXT FSCKING MONTH! Can we say interest free loan to Sprint?
So, let's see. Now I'm out $150 for 1 month, assuming 12% interest, that's $15. (Of course, I don't earn 12% interest, I actually pay about 18.5% interest because of credit-card debt, but whatever...12% is easier to figure). Plus, let's say 2 bounced checks, that's $30x2=$60. Plus, let's not forget that whoever I wrote the checks to are going to charge me. So that's another $30x2=$60. And, let's say one of those checks was to my credit card company, now we have a late fee of $30.
$15+$60+$60+$30=$165. So, you see, really Sprint is giving me that money back at all. I'd been better off if I just gave them the extra $150.
Bottom line, folks...war is messy. And no matter how much money and technology they throw at their stupid liitle war-games, people still die. And innocent people die. And good people die. It just makes for better CNN viewing for the cluelless masses back home.