ASPs are a useful service, they'll be around for a bit, but I seriously doubt that anyone wants to run a word proc that is dependant on a Net connection for functionality. M$ is flying off into their own little world with these NGWS or whatever, more power to 'em (they'll go farther away) --
I'm pretty happy about this for three reasons (or maybe four)
reason the first: I don't have to implement the requirements for collecting information from minors (my comp collects info, voluntarily), sometimes kids wander by (they listen to the radio too). Less work for me, ergo, more/., yippee!
second reason: We had a dept meeting about a month ago talking about how we would implement the stringent requirements, I said (cynically) "well, whatever, the thing is unconstitutional anyway."
'cause piracy is the record industy buzzword as far as MP3 goes.
I mentioned this the last time/. posted a link about this software. Its usefulness, IMHO, won't be tracking down those evil bastards who like music, but finding out what exactly all those evil bastards are listening to. Ratings. Tracking. The same thing will be needed when the bandwidth to share moving pictures becomes commonplace. In a distributed media environment the loss of control scares a whole bunch of people, what they don't realize is that control is the expensive and difficult part of their jobs.
Oh, and we'll probably have to change some laws...or quit funding the folks who would rather sue and ignore new tech than compete. --
It has to be difficult for Katz not to write one of these every few days. A gush about/. (and a slam on slate)
As a quick aside, I think I've visited slate maybe twice in 6 years of surfing. It sucks, like banner ads suck. A first idea that turned out to be way wrong.
One issue he doesn't really go into (too busy blowing the/. collective) is about original content. This site does commentary great, but even the original content produced here is all commentary. Meta-news, if you will.
Another issue that has been ignored is the activist element and freedom that comes from this style of news gathering. One is much more likely to hold an extreme opinion if one sees others who do the same. You don't get extreme opinions from networks news, you can't avoid them here. Personally, I think that is a VERY good thing.
The old media laughing at a couple on-line failures is funny in and of itself. Mainly because there are hundreds of other sites that can pop up instantly to replace them. Competition is so fierce (and looks to be so for a while) that some who have made poor decisions, or gotten unlucky will fail, this is the sign of a healthy marketplace, IMHO.
I guess that's enough for now. Like I said, it's a good read but misses some points and makes others redundantly.
Not to be too squishy, but sites like/. and k5 might very well be the future of news dissemination. The content for news, is just that, news, all the extra fluff is just that, fluff. So with new media (Defined in the article as/.) the fluff comes from the viewers or readers and not the producers of news. This has two effects, first: it cheapens the news creation process (no need for an attractive talking head), second: it cheapens the value of the product (both for consumers and sellers).
So, Katz is pandering, but only because (like many people here believe) Slashdot is really, really, cool. --
umm, seems more likely that he is lying in court. He lobbies for laws, and then denies any knowledge about what those laws are about. He toed the letter of the law just like Clinton did.
Unfortunately, while he should be ignored, he isn't, he was a special assistant to a President, for bob's sake. --
And there's the simple question of "Would you rather see the loser main character (which you should identify with) dating attractive women, or plain women?" --
We even compete with our current installed base more than anything. These are people who say they just want to stay with their current version of Windows. That's our number one competitor. Linux might only be number two. --
Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation?
Who says I don't have a right to kill you, oh yea, we all do. Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation? Same folks. These are our laws, we decide them, and if necessary, we can change them.
Just because you have created something, DOES NOT MEAN you have an exclusive right to control and protect it. These rights are determined by law. Unfortunately, old Walt got enough money together to change the law so nobody else can draw his mouse. Fortunately, enough people are finding out how crooked this whole situation is and are working towards solutions.
You also leave out the question of Time in your statement, this is the most skewed part of our current copyright system.
Audiophiles will never find any sort of lossy compression acceptable anyway unless it is tuned exactly to what THEY PERSONALLY don't hear anyway.
Given an OS audio spec, this is a possibility. How far can you push the compression algorithm and still use the same codec? (if I've got my vocab correct)
I guess these would be considered "tuning forks", eh?:) --
Moffitt, who is overseeing the project, is himself the creator of the open-source Icecast, a streaming MP3 technology similar to Nullsoft's Shoutcast, now owned by America Online. He came to iCast last year when the company acquired Net radio firm Green Witch.
Icecast mixed with a nice audio format, nearly built in, will make for outstanding internet "radio" stations. This is mostly how I listen to MP3. Streaming. There are thousands of stations. All sorts of genres. 24/7/365 No commercials. It's awesome. With this, it will be possible to set up a truly free radio network. When wireless IP becomes common, the real radio better watch out.
And as a quick aside (I deal with radio stations and their web efforts on a daily basis) the radio industry is clueless about what is right around the corner. They are coming around, but now corporate inertia has brought them to a near complete stop. Case in point...This is the webside for AMFMi, the internet arm of AMFM (Yes, I'm serious, they just recently did a "reorg"), the largest radio holding company in the nation. Here is a quick rundown on their "terrestrial" efforts.
Lots of what they call "market potential" around this area, no? --
I'm all for anything that advances space research, just as long as the companies backing the missions don't try to attach any strings to the missions.
Seeing as how a corporate government seems to be the wave of the future, it makes it that much more important to vote with your dollars. Support companies you believe in.
Seeing as how the real government still has lots of guns and missiles. Vote.
Seeing as how we're on only one of what now seems to be millions of planets, support space research.
rephrase that. Only on Slashdot, in a story about The Woz, do you find everyone going on about The Woz, and some lone soul asking, "Didn't Jobs get inducted too?"
I heard a story about a couple of Navy guys who wanted to do a bit of birth control before they went ashore. So they stood in front of the on-board radar array...for about 5 minutes. I think they realized they had cooked their insides about 10 after that.
Umm, you are aware of the general feeling for how to make money on GPLed software right? As a service. You pay for support, not the right to use the bits. And what is this warez you are talking about? In the absence of copyright there would be no such thing. You would be calling them "programs" or some such.
The corps (like they do now) would pay for the service contracts. They could hire teeny warez punks to do it, but they would probably see a nice shiny businessman when they signed on the dotted line.
This sub-thread is about the GPL relyin' on copyright to be effective. The GPL only exists because of copyright, without the stimulus there would be no response.
Note: I'm just explaining what I see. Personally I think copyright has a place*. Stallman didn't think so, so he made a copyleft which uses the rules of copyright to cancel itself out.
I run a small website. Occasionally I review movies. Would it be fair under the "Fair Use Guidelines" for me to include small film clips for purposes for review? And if not, why? And if I can include them, shouldn't I have the right to make them? From a digital source? That I have already bought? --
Slashdot Mirror
My friend has a bunch of X, but he's never heard of a CVS. There must be some mistake.
--
ASPs are a useful service, they'll be around for a bit, but I seriously doubt that anyone wants to run a word proc that is dependant on a Net connection for functionality. M$ is flying off into their own little world with these NGWS or whatever, more power to 'em (they'll go farther away)
--
but then it broke, and now my PDA p's all day. :(
--
this is a great idea. Makes it real easy hack into mozilla (or others) too. Anybody got ICANN's phone #?
--
I'm pretty happy about this for three reasons (or maybe four)
/., yippee!
reason the first: I don't have to implement the requirements for collecting information from minors (my comp collects info, voluntarily), sometimes kids wander by (they listen to the radio too). Less work for me, ergo, more
second reason: We had a dept meeting about a month ago talking about how we would implement the stringent requirements, I said (cynically) "well, whatever, the thing is unconstitutional anyway."
third reason: I think the DMCA is uncon. too.
(four: DMCA dies a grisly death)
--
(nt)
--
'cause piracy is the record industy buzzword as far as MP3 goes.
/. posted a link about this software. Its usefulness, IMHO, won't be tracking down those evil bastards who like music, but finding out what exactly all those evil bastards are listening to. Ratings. Tracking. The same thing will be needed when the bandwidth to share moving pictures becomes commonplace. In a distributed media environment the loss of control scares a whole bunch of people, what they don't realize is that control is the expensive and difficult part of their jobs.
I mentioned this the last time
Oh, and we'll probably have to change some laws...or quit funding the folks who would rather sue and ignore new tech than compete.
--
It has to be difficult for Katz not to write one of these every few days. A gush about /. (and a slam on slate)
/. collective) is about original content. This site does commentary great, but even the original content produced here is all commentary. Meta-news, if you will.
As a quick aside, I think I've visited slate maybe twice in 6 years of surfing. It sucks, like banner ads suck. A first idea that turned out to be way wrong.
One issue he doesn't really go into (too busy blowing the
Another issue that has been ignored is the activist element and freedom that comes from this style of news gathering. One is much more likely to hold an extreme opinion if one sees others who do the same. You don't get extreme opinions from networks news, you can't avoid them here. Personally, I think that is a VERY good thing.
The old media laughing at a couple on-line failures is funny in and of itself. Mainly because there are hundreds of other sites that can pop up instantly to replace them. Competition is so fierce (and looks to be so for a while) that some who have made poor decisions, or gotten unlucky will fail, this is the sign of a healthy marketplace, IMHO.
I guess that's enough for now. Like I said, it's a good read but misses some points and makes others redundantly.
--
Not to be too squishy, but sites like /. and k5 might very well be the future of news dissemination. The content for news, is just that, news, all the extra fluff is just that, fluff. So with new media (Defined in the article as /.) the fluff comes from the viewers or readers and not the producers of news. This has two effects, first: it cheapens the news creation process (no need for an attractive talking head), second: it cheapens the value of the product (both for consumers and sellers).
So, Katz is pandering, but only because (like many people here believe) Slashdot is really, really, cool.
--
umm, seems more likely that he is lying in court. He lobbies for laws, and then denies any knowledge about what those laws are about. He toed the letter of the law just like Clinton did.
Unfortunately, while he should be ignored, he isn't, he was a special assistant to a President, for bob's sake.
--
How do they get hot chicks? Buy 'em.
And there's the simple question of "Would you rather see the loser main character (which you should identify with) dating attractive women, or plain women?"
--
the first one is their customers. What a jerk.
We even compete with our current installed base more than anything. These are people who say they just want to stay with their current version of Windows. That's our number one competitor. Linux might only be number two.
--
...there seems to be only one solution. Whatever platform your are programming on or for, use LOTS of acronyms.
--
Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation?
Who says I don't have a right to kill you, oh yea, we all do. Who says anyone has a right to use another person's creation? Same folks. These are our laws, we decide them, and if necessary, we can change them.
Just because you have created something, DOES NOT MEAN you have an exclusive right to control and protect it. These rights are determined by law. Unfortunately, old Walt got enough money together to change the law so nobody else can draw his mouse. Fortunately, enough people are finding out how crooked this whole situation is and are working towards solutions.
You also leave out the question of Time in your statement, this is the most skewed part of our current copyright system.
--
send them condoms filled with food. Kill two birds with one condom.
--
I've done this too. There is a better selection on Napster than most independent and certainly mass market record stores and radio stations.
Either way, it's good to see Boise on board. It's shaping up to be a pretty big battle.
--
Audiophiles will never find any sort of lossy compression acceptable anyway unless it is tuned exactly to what THEY PERSONALLY don't hear anyway.
:)
Given an OS audio spec, this is a possibility. How far can you push the compression algorithm and still use the same codec? (if I've got my vocab correct)
I guess these would be considered "tuning forks", eh?
--
also, and very important, IMHO.
Moffitt, who is overseeing the project, is himself the creator of the open-source Icecast, a streaming MP3 technology similar to Nullsoft's Shoutcast, now owned by America Online. He came to iCast last year when the company acquired Net radio firm Green Witch.
Icecast mixed with a nice audio format, nearly built in, will make for outstanding internet "radio" stations. This is mostly how I listen to MP3. Streaming. There are thousands of stations. All sorts of genres. 24/7/365 No commercials. It's awesome. With this, it will be possible to set up a truly free radio network. When wireless IP becomes common, the real radio better watch out.
And as a quick aside (I deal with radio stations and their web efforts on a daily basis) the radio industry is clueless about what is right around the corner. They are coming around, but now corporate inertia has brought them to a near complete stop. Case in point...This is the webside for AMFMi, the internet arm of AMFM (Yes, I'm serious, they just recently did a "reorg"), the largest radio holding company in the nation. Here is a quick rundown on their "terrestrial" efforts.
Lots of what they call "market potential" around this area, no?
--
I'm all for anything that advances space research, just as long as the companies backing the missions don't try to attach any strings to the missions.
Seeing as how a corporate government seems to be the wave of the future, it makes it that much more important to vote with your dollars. Support companies you believe in.
Seeing as how the real government still has lots of guns and missiles. Vote.
Seeing as how we're on only one of what now seems to be millions of planets, support space research.
--
you'll have to wait until the War on Violence subsides.
--
rephrase that. Only on Slashdot, in a story about The Woz, do you find everyone going on about The Woz, and some lone soul asking, "Didn't Jobs get inducted too?"
;)
--
I heard a story about a couple of Navy guys who wanted to do a bit of birth control before they went ashore. So they stood in front of the on-board radar array...for about 5 minutes. I think they realized they had cooked their insides about 10 after that.
--
So far the only business model Napster has is attracting VC money..
..and lots of free advertising.
--
Who'd support the sleazy warez version ?
Umm, you are aware of the general feeling for how to make money on GPLed software right? As a service. You pay for support, not the right to use the bits. And what is this warez you are talking about? In the absence of copyright there would be no such thing. You would be calling them "programs" or some such.
The corps (like they do now) would pay for the service contracts. They could hire teeny warez punks to do it, but they would probably see a nice shiny businessman when they signed on the dotted line.
This sub-thread is about the GPL relyin' on copyright to be effective. The GPL only exists because of copyright, without the stimulus there would be no response.
Note: I'm just explaining what I see. Personally I think copyright has a place*. Stallman didn't think so, so he made a copyleft which uses the rules of copyright to cancel itself out.
*a whole 'nother discussion.
--
quick question...
I run a small website. Occasionally I review movies. Would it be fair under the "Fair Use Guidelines" for me to include small film clips for purposes for review? And if not, why? And if I can include them, shouldn't I have the right to make them? From a digital source? That I have already bought?
--