Blogging helps disseminate useful information. If several like-minded people find some information to be useful to them, then chances are it may also be useful to me.
Arnold Kling published an article long ago which elaborates on the theme:
Viral marketing uses the objects of the marketing effort (i.e., you & me as hosts) to propogate the message (virus). So viral marketers try to get people who have been infected by the marketing message: "See Serenity!" to tell others about it.
If you leave your door open and someone walks in, it *is* legal. They are not "breaking and entering." Unless you have some notification of private property, they are not "trespassing," either. Although, when you tell them to leave, if they don't, *then* it's a crime.
Not worth the money
on
Games on Demand
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Given that I generally play a good game for at least a year, I'd hate to drop $120 on it. Although it'd be nice to have only spent $10 on something like Neverwinter Nights.
...with multiple contributors rather than just one, like Instapundit. It's not much different from BoingBoing. Slashdot just has a much more active comments section.
That TAXI episode is one of the rare times I remember actually falling off of the chair laughing - I literally thought I was going to die of heart attack, and I was only about 12.
Yea, I have a couple cars that I found parked on the side of the street. It seemed the owners didn't want them any more. I "hacked" them, too. In the future, maybe we could share "hacking" tips.
If I were in charge of defining it (which I am not, BTW) I'd say it was something that was integral to committing or proliferating the crime (e.g., it couldn't have been done without it.)
On second thought, using that logic, I'd conclude that the internet itself is the "crime-enabling product" in this case.
Whether it's quality, efficiency, reliability or whatnot, people have been "conditioned" to believe that higher price = higher value. When they know little about the product, they will spend more. The more additional information they have, the less they rely solely on price to make decisions.
"At least 12 Web sites feature pictures of women who look almost naked..."
Only 12? Then who is doing all the pr0n spamming?
Re:Changes the dynamic of the business
on
Borrowing ROMs
·
· Score: 1
...would a certain software company sell more than 4x as many copies of their Home OS if they dropped the price from $99 to $25?
Lowering prices is a bad proposition. The volume required to recoup lost profits from price cuts is larger than most people realize. For example, with 20% variable costs and a breakeven of 625 units, lowering price to 25% of orginal would require a volume increase of 1600%.
No. I'd rather everything be available and let SMART consumers make their own decisions. In an information-poor environment, I'll tend to buy products that have the "UL-listed" equivalent seal of approval. But I want the OPTION to buy what I want. This is the basis of a free market. Right now the government enforces an externality on the market that restricts supply - severely raising prices. Of course, you should still punish companies that lie, selling products that claim to have the "good-housekeeping" seal, but really don't.
Membership in the UN Security Council Membership in the G7
And I could restate all the statistics already mentioned to absolutes, rather than relatives - which seems to be your underlying problem. Either you have it, or you don't. (e.g., life expectancy >= 65, per capita income >= $20,000, etc.)
...in his employment contract. Then he might be prohibited from developing competing products. otherwise, it's generally fair game.
It would also depend on whether the technology in question was under patent, copyright, or trademark protection. If not then it is fair game. An exception to this might be if it wasa "trade secret" and the person in question has a previous obligation to uphold that trade secret (e.g, guarding the Secret 11 Herbs and Spices recipe)
They're going to have to create new categories of Repetitive Motion Disorder to accomodate the epidemic that'll occur if millions of horny/.ers get this.
Right now, the only reason I might ever have had to buy a Mac is to make use of the wonderful iPod. As it stands, however, that reason is quickly becoming moot, since I can now use the iPod from my PC.
So now I am buying 3rd party software to enjoy my music.
You'd think that Apple would be *more* willing to support cross-platform hardware devices, since they make the the coolest hardware and a big chunk of apple is owned by our friends at MS.
Maybe MS should have contracted Apple to design the X-Box... ooh.
I'd rather be Tom Cruise - he gets all the chicks. Of course, with my luck I might be Billy Bob Thornton - it looks like he's getting a chick, but she's still sleeping with her brother.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/bankruptcy.html Since you are probably too busy to actually *read* the links that you cite to back up your arguments.
...that you are bankrupt. You do not have the cash available to pay required debts (i.e. you're insolvent).
"A bankruptcy is a legal proceeding that occurs when the liabilities or debts of an individual or firm exceed their assets or revenues over an extended period of time. When individuals or firms declare bankruptcy, their assets are taken and allocated to various creditors, and courts may impose restrictions on their future borrowing capacities." - http://canadianeconomy.gc.ca/english/economy/bankr uptcy.html
Being bankrupt does not preclude a firm from continuing to operate. If a firms becomes insolvent, then they can voluntarily declare bankruptcy, or a creditor can petition them to be declared bankrupt. Any firm that applies for bankruptcy protection is, by definition, bankrupt.
Slashdot Mirror
Blogging helps disseminate useful information. If several like-minded people find some information to be useful to them, then chances are it may also be useful to me.
2 1-875.shtml
Arnold Kling published an article long ago which elaborates on the theme:
http://www.corante.com/bottomline/articles/200206
... same as "idea viruses"
Viral marketing uses the objects of the marketing effort (i.e., you & me as hosts) to propogate the message (virus). So viral marketers try to get people who have been infected by the marketing message: "See Serenity!" to tell others about it.
Which we're doing...
If you leave your door open and someone walks in, it *is* legal. They are not "breaking and entering." Unless you have some notification of private property, they are not "trespassing," either. Although, when you tell them to leave, if they don't, *then* it's a crime.
Given that I generally play a good game for at least a year, I'd hate to drop $120 on it. Although it'd be nice to have only spent $10 on something like Neverwinter Nights.
...with multiple contributors rather than just one, like Instapundit. It's not much different from BoingBoing. Slashdot just has a much more active comments section.
Now *that* was funny.
That TAXI episode is one of the rare times I remember actually falling off of the chair laughing - I literally thought I was going to die of heart attack, and I was only about 12.
Yea, I have a couple cars that I found parked on the side of the street. It seemed the owners didn't want them any more. I "hacked" them, too. In the future, maybe we could share "hacking" tips.
"What, precisely, is a crime-enabling product?"
If I were in charge of defining it (which I am not, BTW) I'd say it was something that was integral to committing or proliferating the crime (e.g., it couldn't have been done without it.)
On second thought, using that logic, I'd conclude that the internet itself is the "crime-enabling product" in this case.
Price contains information.
Whether it's quality, efficiency, reliability or whatnot, people have been "conditioned" to believe that higher price = higher value. When they know little about the product, they will spend more. The more additional information they have, the less they rely solely on price to make decisions.
"At least 12 Web sites feature pictures of women who look almost naked..."
Only 12? Then who is doing all the pr0n spamming?
...would a certain software company sell more than 4x as many copies of their Home OS if they dropped the price from $99 to $25?
Lowering prices is a bad proposition. The volume required to recoup lost profits from price cuts is larger than most people realize. For example, with 20% variable costs and a breakeven of 625 units, lowering price to 25% of orginal would require a volume increase of 1600%.
"The Recording Industry Association of America, which represents the five major labels, said it hoped the radio stations would lose their appeal."
Some stranglehold.
No. I'd rather everything be available and let SMART consumers make their own decisions. In an information-poor environment, I'll tend to buy products that have the "UL-listed" equivalent seal of approval. But I want the OPTION to buy what I want. This is the basis of a free market. Right now the government enforces an externality on the market that restricts supply - severely raising prices. Of course, you should still punish companies that lie, selling products that claim to have the "good-housekeeping" seal, but really don't.
Ok serious answer...
Membership in the UN Security Council
Membership in the G7
And I could restate all the statistics already mentioned to absolutes, rather than relatives - which seems to be your underlying problem. Either you have it, or you don't. (e.g., life expectancy >= 65, per capita income >= $20,000, etc.)
Now stop trolling.
And it got modded to insightful :-) You ought to check the hyperlink before clicking.
...in his employment contract. Then he might be prohibited from developing competing products. otherwise, it's generally fair game.
It would also depend on whether the technology in question was under patent, copyright, or trademark protection. If not then it is fair game. An exception to this might be if it wasa "trade secret" and the person in question has a previous obligation to uphold that trade secret (e.g, guarding the Secret 11 Herbs and Spices recipe)
They're going to have to create new categories of Repetitive Motion Disorder to accomodate the epidemic that'll occur if millions of horny /.ers get this.
Right now, the only reason I might ever have had to buy a Mac is to make use of the wonderful iPod. As it stands, however, that reason is quickly becoming moot, since I can now use the iPod from my PC.
So now I am buying 3rd party software to enjoy my music.
You'd think that Apple would be *more* willing to support cross-platform hardware devices, since they make the the coolest hardware and a big chunk of apple is owned by our friends at MS.
Maybe MS should have contracted Apple to design the X-Box... ooh.
.. and earned money instead. Then they could have bought all that music legally.
Oh... you mean you BOUGHT 3,000 CDs and then spent 20 days ripping them to MP3? Sure...
I'd rather be Tom Cruise - he gets all the chicks. Of course, with my luck I might be Billy Bob Thornton - it looks like he's getting a chick, but she's still sleeping with her brother.
There is no helicopter
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/bankruptcy.html
Since you are probably too busy to actually *read* the links that you cite to back up your arguments.
You have no excuse for ignorance. Maybe you should read the U.S. Code to which you linked.
Cost me $289,000 to change the name on the title to my house.
...that you are bankrupt. You do not have the cash available to pay required debts (i.e. you're insolvent).
r uptcy.html
"A bankruptcy is a legal proceeding that occurs when the liabilities or debts of an individual or firm exceed their assets or revenues over an extended period of time. When individuals or firms declare bankruptcy, their assets are taken and allocated to various creditors, and courts may impose restrictions on their future borrowing capacities." - http://canadianeconomy.gc.ca/english/economy/bank
Being bankrupt does not preclude a firm from continuing to operate. If a firms becomes insolvent, then they can voluntarily declare bankruptcy, or a creditor can petition them to be declared bankrupt. Any firm that applies for bankruptcy protection is, by definition, bankrupt.