Your comment applies just as well to book-writers, programmers, etc etc etc.
Yes, it does. Publishing companies, software houses. The publishing companies still have some life in that it's still better to have and read a real physical book than it is to read an ebook.
So these supposed economic realities you're referencing are far less absolute than you make them out to be.
No sorry, they aren't. In terms of physical property, it is the limited supply which gives it value. There is no such thing as inherent value, there is only the market value which is the result of supply and demand.
It has nothing to do with respect for property rights whether they are intellectual or physical. People attempt to retain their value which is relatively simple with something which has a limited supply like a physical object, but impossible with information which has an infinite supply. Really you can try all you like, but as I said, you'll lose, and you'll waste a load of money in the process.
Sorry, them's the breaks, the record companies lost the instant they started producing digital information. Forget "should" and right or wrong, it's pure economics. It's like complaining about gravity or the speed of light.
Digital information is trivially copyable, that's a simple statement of fact. All it takes is a single copy to be distributed exponentially. The cost or value of the bit of digital information essentially works out at zero. Copyrights, laws, even digital rights management systems don't change that economic fact of life. You can complain, threaten, sue, encrypt, legislate, tear at your hair as much as you like but you absolutely will lose to that economic reality.
The buggy^H^H^H^H^Hrecord companies should close down, liquidate their assets before it's all blown on futile attempts to control digital information. The artists should get into their vans, tour to promote themselves and sell downloads online at 10c a pop.
Whether you believe it's right or wrong is irrelevant, the economic reality is that as the supply of something increases, the value of it drops and digital information being trivially copyable has an infinite supply. The value of digital information (any digital information) will tend towards zero, that means ebooks, music, audio, video, software. The idea that digital information can be a product is economically naive, it can only be a service.
Record companies which try to fight this new reality are doing their shareholders a disservice, they either have to completely re-invent themselves as a service which provides low cost digital information or they should return their value to their shareholders as soon as possible.
The irony is that the original correct saying originated in the UK and was exported, we are now importing the corrupt US version. You wouldn't see that irony, because well, 1: You're American and I think they remove that part of the brain at birth, or maybe you're innoculated against it, how else do we explain George Dubbya Bush? and 2: You're American and use the incorrect version without thought (again which is normal American practice).
Given your inaccuracy so far, should I even bother reading the rest of your post?
Again, another misunderstanding you have - The national debt is a credit line extended to US corporations backed by the rest of the world.
Actually it's backed by the oil producing countries and your other suppliers mostly in asia. Their continued purchasing of US debt is dependant on the dollar maintaining it's value, after all they want their investment back. I don't know if you noticed, but the dollar is sliding and the oil producers and suppliers are quietly switching away from holding dollars and US debt. Guess what, all that spending means higher inflation, just another form of taxation, you will have noticed it climbing, you'd better talk to your boss about a salary increase.
Maybe your government should spend money a bit more wisely on intelligence rather than retaliating against empty tents from 40,000 feet. Maybe they would be able to actually catch the terrorists. It's that over priced and under performing American way thing again. How much are you spending on the War on Terror? How many terrorists have you caught and brought to justice? Would that be 20 billion dollars per terrorist? More? Or have you wised up yet and realised the Iraq war has nothing to do with terrorism.
Yeah, instead of some health tourism, you have either insanely high medical insurance or none at all, you have an unimaginably large national debt instead of high taxation and since you mention it, you managed to allow terrorists to take out a couple of buildings as opposed to sneaking on to some trains.
Yup, you don't half do things bigger and better over there. Good luck behind that SUV.
It doesn't make sense as sarcasm either, as a statement it has no direction. Sarcasm is used on statements with a emphasis of direction, like "Another/. language lawyer. Great.". The "Great" has a definite positive emphasis which can be interpreted sarcastically, "I could care less" has no emphasis, it has nothing. A sarcastic version of "I couldn't care less" would be "I couldn't care more". "I could care less" is just bleh.
I think the expression has evolved to encompass the meaning that, while technically, one could "care less," it is such a small difference that it isn't even worth the effort to imagine such a state. Just a thought.
Or, it's being repeated parrot fashion without thought to the real meaning of the words and was misheard by the person who initially began spreading the corrupted version across the US.
Could not care less. i.e. you care so little that it's impossible to care less.
Think about it for a second, it doesn't make any sense to say "could care less". By doing so you are saying you care enough that it is possible to care less.
The irony of this saying is that it must have come from the UK because we all get it right, it must have been picked up by someone who didn't understand the meaning and now the senseless version spreads across the US.
In terms of quality, the cheap jeans are higher quality than the designer jeans because they fit my purpose better.
They fit well, the are equally hard wearing and look just as good as the designer pair, in fact nobody can tell the difference without looking at the labels.
Scroll to the last story. However, you feel free to just go on paying the 2000% markup. If you ask nicely they'll stamp "gullible" on your forehead at the till.
"Google's server could go down, the company's internet access could go down, someone could attempt to brute-force their way into the account, and so on..."
The local hard disk could crash, they could get a virus, be attacked by script kiddies, a local switch could fail, the laptop could be dropped etc. Remote systems are no more risk than local ones. With remote systems you usually have competent admins, mirrored storage, secure connections, highly available networks etc. The risks are just a little different.
Getting, installing, fixing, securing, upgrading. Not interested.
It's like me and my car, couldn't care less as long as it gets me from A to B. If public transport could get me pretty much from A to B as well as the car I'd happily ditch it. Same's true of computers, if they can get rid of all the IT bollocks, they will, happily.
One or two person companies. For them this is perfect. Microsoft have long since forgotten about this crowd as they focused more and more on the corporate customer.
He did all the things you mentioned, but frankly the US didn't give a toss about that.
The problem was that the second largest oil field in the world would soon only be available in Euros. Which would mean that oil buyers wouldn't have to buy dollars to get the oil. Which reduces the demand for US dollars. So. supply and demand. demand for dollars decreases, the value decreases, the US dollar begins falling in value. The dollar is worth less the more of them you need to buy things, That's called inflation and guess what, devaluing dollars severely limits the US government's ability to print more of them with abandon, to pay their huge military, to pay huge subsidies to industry and farmers etc etc.
Guess what. Iran is planning to set up an oil exchange which would operate in Euros. I wonder who's going to be hit next.
I mean, regression to match candidates against an existing body of data, we have dating web sites which do that these days. Nice way of quickly sorting the candidates but Nature material?
or subcontractors. How is this different from any other journalist/columnist paid news site or magazine? Oh... They're pretending to be social news sites. That's called marketing.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it does. Publishing companies, software houses. The publishing companies still have some life in that it's still better to have and read a real physical book than it is to read an ebook.
No sorry, they aren't. In terms of physical property, it is the limited supply which gives it value. There is no such thing as inherent value, there is only the market value which is the result of supply and demand.
It has nothing to do with respect for property rights whether they are intellectual or physical. People attempt to retain their value which is relatively simple with something which has a limited supply like a physical object, but impossible with information which has an infinite supply. Really you can try all you like, but as I said, you'll lose, and you'll waste a load of money in the process.
Sorry, them's the breaks, the record companies lost the instant they started producing digital information. Forget "should" and right or wrong, it's pure economics. It's like complaining about gravity or the speed of light.
Digital information is trivially copyable, that's a simple statement of fact. All it takes is a single copy to be distributed exponentially. The cost or value of the bit of digital information essentially works out at zero. Copyrights, laws, even digital rights management systems don't change that economic fact of life. You can complain, threaten, sue, encrypt, legislate, tear at your hair as much as you like but you absolutely will lose to that economic reality.
The buggy^H^H^H^H^Hrecord companies should close down, liquidate their assets before it's all blown on futile attempts to control digital information. The artists should get into their vans, tour to promote themselves and sell downloads online at 10c a pop.
Whether you believe it's right or wrong is irrelevant, the economic reality is that as the supply of something increases, the value of it drops and digital information being trivially copyable has an infinite supply. The value of digital information (any digital information) will tend towards zero, that means ebooks, music, audio, video, software. The idea that digital information can be a product is economically naive, it can only be a service.
Record companies which try to fight this new reality are doing their shareholders a disservice, they either have to completely re-invent themselves as a service which provides low cost digital information or they should return their value to their shareholders as soon as possible.
The irony is that the original correct saying originated in the UK and was exported, we are now importing the corrupt US version. You wouldn't see that irony, because well, 1: You're American and I think they remove that part of the brain at birth, or maybe you're innoculated against it, how else do we explain George Dubbya Bush? and 2: You're American and use the incorrect version without thought (again which is normal American practice).
Pay vs adverts?
What most people will continue to do is ignore itunes and spiralfrog and simply continue downloading the music for free.
Really. American health insurance premiums are decreasing? Hmmm I guess all the double digit increases reported in these articles are wrong then.
http://www.kff.org/insurance/chcm090904nr.cfm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-03-16-he
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
Given your inaccuracy so far, should I even bother reading the rest of your post?
Actually it's backed by the oil producing countries and your other suppliers mostly in asia. Their continued purchasing of US debt is dependant on the dollar maintaining it's value, after all they want their investment back. I don't know if you noticed, but the dollar is sliding and the oil producers and suppliers are quietly switching away from holding dollars and US debt. Guess what, all that spending means higher inflation, just another form of taxation, you will have noticed it climbing, you'd better talk to your boss about a salary increase.
e.g.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti
Maybe your government should spend money a bit more wisely on intelligence rather than retaliating against empty tents from 40,000 feet. Maybe they would be able to actually catch the terrorists. It's that over priced and under performing American way thing again. How much are you spending on the War on Terror? How many terrorists have you caught and brought to justice? Would that be 20 billion dollars per terrorist? More? Or have you wised up yet and realised the Iraq war has nothing to do with terrorism.
Yeah, instead of some health tourism, you have either insanely high medical insurance or none at all, you have an unimaginably large national debt instead of high taxation and since you mention it, you managed to allow terrorists to take out a couple of buildings as opposed to sneaking on to some trains.
Yup, you don't half do things bigger and better over there. Good luck behind that SUV.
It doesn't make sense as sarcasm either, as a statement it has no direction. Sarcasm is used on statements with a emphasis of direction, like "Another /. language lawyer. Great.". The "Great" has a definite positive emphasis which can be interpreted sarcastically, "I could care less" has no emphasis, it has nothing. A sarcastic version of "I couldn't care less" would be "I couldn't care more". "I could care less" is just bleh.
Or, it's being repeated parrot fashion without thought to the real meaning of the words and was misheard by the person who initially began spreading the corrupted version across the US.
Overpriced underperformance is the American way. What are you complaining about?
Could not care less. i.e. you care so little that it's impossible to care less.
Think about it for a second, it doesn't make any sense to say "could care less". By doing so you are saying you care enough that it is possible to care less.
The irony of this saying is that it must have come from the UK because we all get it right, it must have been picked up by someone who didn't understand the meaning and now the senseless version spreads across the US.
In terms of quality, the cheap jeans are higher quality than the designer jeans because they fit my purpose better.
1 .htm
They fit well, the are equally hard wearing and look just as good as the designer pair, in fact nobody can tell the difference without looking at the labels.
e.g.
http://www.fashionunited.co.uk/news/archive/jeans
Scroll to the last story. However, you feel free to just go on paying the 2000% markup. If you ask nicely they'll stamp "gullible" on your forehead at the till.
People tend to drive the direction they're looking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_fixation
My jeans cost £3. Look, no badge, no brand. Equivalent Levis, £40.
Sure for basic stuff, it isn't terribly advanced. I also use google calendars.
"Google's server could go down, the company's internet access could go down, someone could attempt to brute-force their way into the account, and so on..."
The local hard disk could crash, they could get a virus, be attacked by script kiddies, a local switch could fail, the laptop could be dropped etc. Remote systems are no more risk than local ones. With remote systems you usually have competent admins, mirrored storage, secure connections, highly available networks etc. The risks are just a little different.
I can just imagine the neds trying to impress each other with their new shell suits on the street corners on friday nights.
Thank you for this advance in fabric technology Philips.
Getting, installing, fixing, securing, upgrading. Not interested.
It's like me and my car, couldn't care less as long as it gets me from A to B. If public transport could get me pretty much from A to B as well as the car I'd happily ditch it. Same's true of computers, if they can get rid of all the IT bollocks, they will, happily.
One or two person companies. For them this is perfect. Microsoft have long since forgotten about this crowd as they focused more and more on the corporate customer.
It's for small businesses.
This is inevitable btw, as the cost of bandwidth drops and support costs remain relatively constant.
He did all the things you mentioned, but frankly the US didn't give a toss about that.
The problem was that the second largest oil field in the world would soon only be available in Euros. Which would mean that oil buyers wouldn't have to buy dollars to get the oil. Which reduces the demand for US dollars. So. supply and demand. demand for dollars decreases, the value decreases, the US dollar begins falling in value. The dollar is worth less the more of them you need to buy things, That's called inflation and guess what, devaluing dollars severely limits the US government's ability to print more of them with abandon, to pay their huge military, to pay huge subsidies to industry and farmers etc etc.
Guess what. Iran is planning to set up an oil exchange which would operate in Euros. I wonder who's going to be hit next.
The more people look about for alternatives. It's an economic truth of any monopoly, including governments.
e.g.
http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/
I mean, regression to match candidates against an existing body of data, we have dating web sites which do that these days. Nice way of quickly sorting the candidates but Nature material?
or subcontractors. How is this different from any other journalist/columnist paid news site or magazine? Oh... They're pretending to be social news sites. That's called marketing.