But information doesn't want to be free. The stories do not write themselves, the information doesn't reveal itself. People have to spend time gathering, organizing, and communicating that information. Information is pretty easy to share, now that we have created a global network of information processing devices, but getting it to that network is a little bit more difficult.
Correction: no one who creates their own content has successfully made any significant amount of money off of advertising on the Internet. (I hate the FTFY meme).
Google makes money indexing other people's content and selling ads because it can be done cheaply. Bloggers, like Arianna Huffington, can make money linking to other people's news content because opinion can be cranked out pretty fast (and because it is less difficult to throw 60 hours a week at linking to interesting news stories and videos)...
But reporters, editors, fact checkers, etc cost money. It is hard to produce quality content than to link to it.
Most media sites initially tried to make their money off of advertising, it's only the continued failure of that model that is driving them to try something new.
Agreed. The biggest problem the media faces is that they have been trying this "innovative new business model" for at least a decade, and now people expect it.
You just cited a business model that no longer exists (free ad-supported TV) to defend a business model that NYT has been trying for ten years, while bashing them for moving away from that failed model...because you want them to try something new?
Hopefully most Slashdotters would at least make a minimal effort at wiping personal data off of any computer before selling it on.
It is also possible that the laptop is stolen. I don't know, but if it is new enough to be passed off as brand new, then there has to be a story of why it is for sale.
As complicated as that process can get, I'm surprised we don't see an MS Divorce 2011 suite available. They can even have a Professional and Ultimate edition depending on if you have kids and/or wealthy.
My wife caught me cheating, but I tried to tell her about Microsoft Divorce. "It's not adultery", I said. "I'm just using the fifteen day trial".
Exactly what it means. The video game is not reality. It is fiction.
I don't think that anybody is assuming that Duke Nukem is a real person. My point is that there are several subtle messages that go beyond "don't shoot alien pigs". This man, if he were real is a psychotherapists wet dream. Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him, from his disrespect for women, to the disrespect for civilized society, to the anger and aggression issues, is far beyond the capabilities of most parents.
Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
The discussion need only happen once, as far as I know.
No, it doesn't work like that. You ever follow politics? There is a reason politicians come up with catch phrases and repeat them over and over. Advertisers come up with slogans and repeat them for the same reason; repetition works. I just wrote that comment 6 hours ago and can't remember all of it. I imagine that neither of us will remember it six months from now. If you want to compete with a bad idea that is constantly reinforced, then you will need to stay vigilant. You would need to keep making constant reminders that being a cynical asshole who treats women like meat is not cool (even if fifteen year-olds think differently), and you would somehow seem more cool than the video game character (hard to do when you're the 35 year-old who punishes him for not eating his vegetables).
What do you mean to say is "not real"? Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
Violence does not solve problems. We live in a society full of laws, and even in times of war do not punch the enemy in the testicles because it is ineffective and is possibly a violation of the Geneva convention. Also, cops are not always bad. They are a necessary part of society and the situation is far more complicated than the pork and Nazi references make it sound.
Also, do not kidnap women, and I cannot stress this next part enough, never rape a woman, not even if she's a "babe". Do it once and she'll never forgive you. Believe me, I once straddled your mom when she was asleep and she hasn't stopped bitching about it since...
The unmanned flying saucer, named "Zohal", was unveiled in a ceremony attended by Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei.
That's technology for you! We predicted flying cars, and failed to predict more efficient ways to produce food. (Or maybe the flying car people were predicting both, and the "holy fuck, what if we don't have food" people were predicting neither).
I know it is popular to just sit back and assume that the free market will swoop in at the last moment and sell us a product that will allow us to fix the problems we see ahead of us, without ever seeing a negative impact from it. If only they had capitalism in ancient Rome, someone could have invented a "keep your empire from collapsing" spray and they would still be on top. But, someday, the free market will sell us a global warming kit that will fix all that, a hunger kit that will remove all hunger, and a poverty kit that will fix poverty.
But, the invisible hand is not a superhero. It cannot fix every problem, and the problems it can fix are only fixable when there is a demand, which people like you are driving down with such statements.
I am hoping to see the day when the $150 books are replaced by hyperlinks to the ePub or PDF, and students just buy an eBook reader to view them. The only problem is that I understand that most writers do not want to give their work away for free. I wonder if there might be enough money to be made by producing a kindle/nook version of a high quality textbook, and selling it in their markets for a fraction of what college textbooks usually cost.
By the way, where do you work where you can make $100K or more with powerpoint docs and diagrams?
Defense contracting...pretty much says it all, doesn't it?
Were you around during the Bush 43 years? I was rather impressed by "Operation: Convincing Powerpoint" and the use of visual materials in "The Oration Initiative".
In 2007, the bottom 60% of Americans had 65% of their net worth tied up in their homes.
I'm sorry if I have little sympathy for those who mortgaged their homes to the hilt in an effort to keep up ridiculous lifestyles. I understand the sociological pressures that are placed on the average American due to advertising and socialization - but all it takes to break the cycle of debt is to do some simple math, that is - "I make x amount of dollars and thus i should not spend more than y in order to provide for my family." Yes it would be nice to drive a Bugatti and live in a big house, but the reality of the situation is that when you can't afford that, you shouldn't buy it. The culture of excess is ridiculous - the belief that everyone can participate in it, even more so.
Who said anything about any of what you just said? The article is saying that since the bottom 60% of Americans have all their wealth invested in their homes, and the value of that just dropped, then they no longer have as much wealth as they used to. But, the top earners have 10% of their wealth invested in their homes, and the rest in investments that are recovering much more nicely (Thanks Bush and Obama!). This was nothing more than an explanation that things have probably gotten worse since the chart was made.
I guess that the transition to 5D means that all the matter that we know (atoms, light,...), will be destroyed.
Not necessarily. To visualize increasing dimensions, think of a sheet of paper. Two dimensions. Imagine it being progressively crumpled, until it becomes a paper ball. Now it's three dimensional. Everything you wrote on the paper is still intact.
Now, try doing that to a monopoly board. How would it feel to be one of the people living in the houses and hotels?:)
I'm pro-life on the issue, but I don't really see it as hypocrisy. Some conservatives believe that the government has a responsibility to defend a core set of civil liberties, and do nothing more*. They believe in criminal law as a means to defend those liberties. So, they have a responsibility to determine when those liberties apply and when they do not. In other words, if the government has the authority to say "murder is illegal", then they have a responsibility to define what "murder" is.
* The politicians they vote for will support every form of corporate welfare imaginable, but many of this subset would vote for Ron Paul or Rand Paul in a second, if they thought he could get elected.
What's wrong with that...All it says is that he is an untrained economist who couldn't balance a budget well enough money to pay for school. But on the bright side, it sounds like a shitty school. Not paying for it is probably the best decision he ever made.
But then the rest of the American South would get jealous.
Not me. My only reservation against succession is that I'm already on the wrong side of the fence. If the teapartiers secede and turn us into "North Mexico", then people like me are pretty much screwed.
Republicans have been pushing their version of political correctness for a while. The idea of creationists playing the persecution card is nothing new. The notion that the media has a bias against them...The post 9/11 claims that you are unpatriotic if you don't wear a flag on your outfit and retrofit your language to remove phrases like "french fries" and "suicide bomber" because they glorify our country's enemies...Claims that white Christian men are the only people you can legally make fun of in America...
The more important question is - how will you know it's okay to download it? I mean, what differentiates one movie on bit torrent versus another? It sounds like this just muddies things. After all, if one movie is okay to download on bit torrent (and I don't know what would identify it as being authorized to download by the copyright holder when you're looking at a torrent index) and a movie that isn't?
They could put a magnet hash on their site and have a disclaimer stating "This is the legal one. We can't vouch for what other sites host".
If the plot is that involved, then I'd say the best hope to do it right would be if HBO or Showtime got it and turned it into a one-off series. I don't know if it would be that profitable to start a series that you know is going to last for only one season, but it would be the best way to be faithful to the book (and garner a year of loyalty from a niche market).
I remember that. My state is heading that way. It was on the platform of our recently-elected, smug teabagging dickhead of a governor.
BTW, I'd hardly call Pennsylvania a "blue state."
Also, if you think that kind of corruption hasn't already made it to where you live, you're deluding yourself.
Correction: I we already have them in my home state (Tennessee). It's hard to get good information on them, as it tends to fly under the radar, until an abuse scandal pops up.
You do: the local provider, or following this guy's example and creating your own. There, two options, now get to work and quit your bitching.
So, in what world does "quit your job, borrow a shitload of money and start your own ISP, just so you can get decent internet access" seem reasonable? I'm sure the company would collapse after he got hungry and quit that job so he could go build a McDonald's.
Slashdot Mirror
But information doesn't want to be free. The stories do not write themselves, the information doesn't reveal itself. People have to spend time gathering, organizing, and communicating that information. Information is pretty easy to share, now that we have created a global network of information processing devices, but getting it to that network is a little bit more difficult.
Correction: no one who creates their own content has successfully made any significant amount of money off of advertising on the Internet. (I hate the FTFY meme).
Google makes money indexing other people's content and selling ads because it can be done cheaply. Bloggers, like Arianna Huffington, can make money linking to other people's news content because opinion can be cranked out pretty fast (and because it is less difficult to throw 60 hours a week at linking to interesting news stories and videos)...
But reporters, editors, fact checkers, etc cost money. It is hard to produce quality content than to link to it.
Most media sites initially tried to make their money off of advertising, it's only the continued failure of that model that is driving them to try something new.
Agreed. The biggest problem the media faces is that they have been trying this "innovative new business model" for at least a decade, and now people expect it.
You just cited a business model that no longer exists (free ad-supported TV) to defend a business model that NYT has been trying for ten years, while bashing them for moving away from that failed model...because you want them to try something new?
Hopefully most Slashdotters would at least make a minimal effort at wiping personal data off of any computer before selling it on.
It is also possible that the laptop is stolen. I don't know, but if it is new enough to be passed off as brand new, then there has to be a story of why it is for sale.
As complicated as that process can get, I'm surprised we don't see an MS Divorce 2011 suite available. They can even have a Professional and Ultimate edition depending on if you have kids and/or wealthy.
My wife caught me cheating, but I tried to tell her about Microsoft Divorce. "It's not adultery", I said. "I'm just using the fifteen day trial".
What do you mean to say is "not real"?
Exactly what it means. The video game is not reality. It is fiction.
I don't think that anybody is assuming that Duke Nukem is a real person. My point is that there are several subtle messages that go beyond "don't shoot alien pigs". This man, if he were real is a psychotherapists wet dream. Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him, from his disrespect for women, to the disrespect for civilized society, to the anger and aggression issues, is far beyond the capabilities of most parents.
Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
The discussion need only happen once, as far as I know.
No, it doesn't work like that. You ever follow politics? There is a reason politicians come up with catch phrases and repeat them over and over. Advertisers come up with slogans and repeat them for the same reason; repetition works. I just wrote that comment 6 hours ago and can't remember all of it. I imagine that neither of us will remember it six months from now. If you want to compete with a bad idea that is constantly reinforced, then you will need to stay vigilant. You would need to keep making constant reminders that being a cynical asshole who treats women like meat is not cool (even if fifteen year-olds think differently), and you would somehow seem more cool than the video game character (hard to do when you're the 35 year-old who punishes him for not eating his vegetables).
What do you mean to say is "not real"? Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
Violence does not solve problems. We live in a society full of laws, and even in times of war do not punch the enemy in the testicles because it is ineffective and is possibly a violation of the Geneva convention. Also, cops are not always bad. They are a necessary part of society and the situation is far more complicated than the pork and Nazi references make it sound.
Also, do not kidnap women, and I cannot stress this next part enough, never rape a woman, not even if she's a "babe". Do it once and she'll never forgive you. Believe me, I once straddled your mom when she was asleep and she hasn't stopped bitching about it since...
Ok, so women have commercials where guys are depicted as lovable dummies, some as wife-beaters, and most as bad-boy womanizers.
Men now have a game where the hero is portrayed as a rapist who kidnaps and beats women.
How are these two the comparable?
The unmanned flying saucer, named "Zohal", was unveiled in a ceremony attended by Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei.
They stole this from L. Ron Hubbard, didn't they?
Update your sig. It's outdated by like 3 months.
Too late! Copyright troll wins again!
----
Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching. (Take that snowraver1)
So food shortages lead to unrest, which makes it difficult to use the resources productively, which leads to food shortages?
I'm not saying you're wrong, btw. I'm just saying that this appears to be a feedback loop.
That's technology for you! We predicted flying cars, and failed to predict more efficient ways to produce food. (Or maybe the flying car people were predicting both, and the "holy fuck, what if we don't have food" people were predicting neither).
I know it is popular to just sit back and assume that the free market will swoop in at the last moment and sell us a product that will allow us to fix the problems we see ahead of us, without ever seeing a negative impact from it. If only they had capitalism in ancient Rome, someone could have invented a "keep your empire from collapsing" spray and they would still be on top. But, someday, the free market will sell us a global warming kit that will fix all that, a hunger kit that will remove all hunger, and a poverty kit that will fix poverty.
But, the invisible hand is not a superhero. It cannot fix every problem, and the problems it can fix are only fixable when there is a demand, which people like you are driving down with such statements.
Thanks for releasing the book.
I am hoping to see the day when the $150 books are replaced by hyperlinks to the ePub or PDF, and students just buy an eBook reader to view them. The only problem is that I understand that most writers do not want to give their work away for free. I wonder if there might be enough money to be made by producing a kindle/nook version of a high quality textbook, and selling it in their markets for a fraction of what college textbooks usually cost.
I'm only surprised that the "don't be a gay-basher" clause wasn't the part that somebody had a problem with.
By the way, where do you work where you can make $100K or more with powerpoint docs and diagrams?
Defense contracting...pretty much says it all, doesn't it?
Were you around during the Bush 43 years? I was rather impressed by "Operation: Convincing Powerpoint" and the use of visual materials in "The Oration Initiative".
In 2007, the bottom 60% of Americans had 65% of their net worth tied up in their homes.
I'm sorry if I have little sympathy for those who mortgaged their homes to the hilt in an effort to keep up ridiculous lifestyles. I understand the sociological pressures that are placed on the average American due to advertising and socialization - but all it takes to break the cycle of debt is to do some simple math, that is - "I make x amount of dollars and thus i should not spend more than y in order to provide for my family." Yes it would be nice to drive a Bugatti and live in a big house, but the reality of the situation is that when you can't afford that, you shouldn't buy it. The culture of excess is ridiculous - the belief that everyone can participate in it, even more so.
Who said anything about any of what you just said? The article is saying that since the bottom 60% of Americans have all their wealth invested in their homes, and the value of that just dropped, then they no longer have as much wealth as they used to. But, the top earners have 10% of their wealth invested in their homes, and the rest in investments that are recovering much more nicely (Thanks Bush and Obama!). This was nothing more than an explanation that things have probably gotten worse since the chart was made.
I guess that the transition to 5D means that all the matter that we know (atoms, light, ...), will be destroyed.
Not necessarily. To visualize increasing dimensions, think of a sheet of paper. Two dimensions. Imagine it being progressively crumpled, until it becomes a paper ball. Now it's three dimensional. Everything you wrote on the paper is still intact.
Now, try doing that to a monopoly board. How would it feel to be one of the people living in the houses and hotels? :)
I'm pro-life on the issue, but I don't really see it as hypocrisy. Some conservatives believe that the government has a responsibility to defend a core set of civil liberties, and do nothing more*. They believe in criminal law as a means to defend those liberties. So, they have a responsibility to determine when those liberties apply and when they do not. In other words, if the government has the authority to say "murder is illegal", then they have a responsibility to define what "murder" is.
* The politicians they vote for will support every form of corporate welfare imaginable, but many of this subset would vote for Ron Paul or Rand Paul in a second, if they thought he could get elected.
What's wrong with that...All it says is that he is an untrained economist who couldn't balance a budget well enough money to pay for school. But on the bright side, it sounds like a shitty school. Not paying for it is probably the best decision he ever made.
But then the rest of the American South would get jealous.
Not me. My only reservation against succession is that I'm already on the wrong side of the fence. If the teapartiers secede and turn us into "North Mexico", then people like me are pretty much screwed.
Republicans have been pushing their version of political correctness for a while. The idea of creationists playing the persecution card is nothing new. The notion that the media has a bias against them...The post 9/11 claims that you are unpatriotic if you don't wear a flag on your outfit and retrofit your language to remove phrases like "french fries" and "suicide bomber" because they glorify our country's enemies...Claims that white Christian men are the only people you can legally make fun of in America...
To me it all sounds like political correctness.
The more important question is - how will you know it's okay to download it? I mean, what differentiates one movie on bit torrent versus another? It sounds like this just muddies things. After all, if one movie is okay to download on bit torrent (and I don't know what would identify it as being authorized to download by the copyright holder when you're looking at a torrent index) and a movie that isn't?
They could put a magnet hash on their site and have a disclaimer stating "This is the legal one. We can't vouch for what other sites host".
If the plot is that involved, then I'd say the best hope to do it right would be if HBO or Showtime got it and turned it into a one-off series. I don't know if it would be that profitable to start a series that you know is going to last for only one season, but it would be the best way to be faithful to the book (and garner a year of loyalty from a niche market).
I remember that. My state is heading that way. It was on the platform of our recently-elected, smug teabagging dickhead of a governor.
BTW, I'd hardly call Pennsylvania a "blue state."
Also, if you think that kind of corruption hasn't already made it to where you live, you're deluding yourself.
Correction: I we already have them in my home state (Tennessee). It's hard to get good information on them, as it tends to fly under the radar, until an abuse scandal pops up.
You do: the local provider, or following this guy's example and creating your own. There, two options, now get to work and quit your bitching.
So, in what world does "quit your job, borrow a shitload of money and start your own ISP, just so you can get decent internet access" seem reasonable? I'm sure the company would collapse after he got hungry and quit that job so he could go build a McDonald's.