It's only called piracy because our current laws are not up to speed with the reality of the situation (~no copying or distrubution costs for either the producer or the consumer). And still it is only piracy if you make copes and SELL them. I don't call it piracy, I call it listening to music.
How many people die in the book? Will there be nudity? If this thing is touchy feely crap, I'm gonn puke. Hmmm, would Katz write touchy feely crap? aaaah whatever, tgif....
However, word of mouth on the internet (email especially) is a very powerful force. How else can you explain the Mahir phenomenon?
certain things can gain instant attention. Anybody seen the Hampsterdance? (on the TV *net commercial) or the Mahir you have referred to, featured on the Daily Show, no less. But, for a viable commercial entity this kind of stuff doesn't work. If I start spamming my friends telling them about how great/. is, I doubt the response will be as good as it would be for something like this. E-mail friend marketing is only good for a momentary laugh, not a high-speed million dollar long term Internet business.
And who says the blanket spam/popup/banner ads crap that AOL does are all that effective anyway?
These guys and these guys and these folks, (and others that take more than 15 seconds to find) the basic consensus is that these types of ads work better, but annoy folks. Howver, newbies won't realize that these ads should be annoying, will accept them as normal, and outweigh the clued by a large enough margin that media providers like, oh, say, AOL, can ignore user compaints and keep painting my rare earth elements with crap.
Music is a whole 'nother story, I think we can win that one. And I agree with the big busines imploding idea, IBM is a great example. But, AOL owns ICQ, and Shoutcast, and Winamp (yes, I know about icecast, and *cq and XMMS). I've ranted about this topic enough (check my info page), so I'll stop now.
and it all goes into how much faith and realiance you put into the program your watching, the electronic signal that comes through your screen. if you really want to know what's going on, then go. if not you're not gonna go, then you gotta trust someone. but they never promised that they wouldn't alter the image.
uh oh, they didn't promise that they won't come to my house and kill me, should I be scared? So the only rational way to trust the media now, is to explicitly NOT trust them, then they must explicitly state they won't lie, back it up for a few years, then I can trust 'em again?
Actually I think that's a better way to approach media now. Don't give 'em the time of day until you see their sour^H^H^H^Hethics guidebook.
Rather himself weighed into the controversy Thursday in an interview with the New York Times, in which he said he regretted the TV trickery, saying it was ``a mistake.''
``At the very least we should have pointed out to viewers we were doing it,'' he said. ``I did not grasp the possible ethical implications of this and that was wrong on my part.'
So, Dan actually thinks its kinda "wrong" to lie to people? Wow, journalistic integrity at it's top.
CBS News President Andrew Heyward defended the use of such new technology
Meet Dan's boss.
Asked whether he believed it was deliberate deception on CBS's part, Heyward said: ``The answer is no, I don't think it was. This is part of the evolution of graphics. They get more and more sophisticated...it does raise new issues.''
What? You mean like ethical issues? Like, "Maybe we should tell people what they're seeing is fake" kind of issues?
and
And ABC News apologized a few years ago for a segment in which reporter Cokie Roberts was said to be reporting from Capitol Hill, when she was in fact in the network's Washington bureau in front of a photograph of the Capitol building.
Let's rephrase this, ABC apologized a few years ago when they lied to save a few bucks, after they got caught. Remember...
CBS is owned by CBS Corp. (NYSE:CBS - news) NBC is owned by General Electric Co. (NYSE:GE - news) and ABC by Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - news).
And all of these are responsible to their shareholders to maximize profits. Nothin' like saving millions with new technology!
This technology is real cute, until it's used to show some Chinese/Iraqi/Evil Empire of the Week troops killing 30 Americans in cold blood to ramp up public opinion to grab new resources for the starving childrn in this country.
For one, you can create a significant population for a 'nature vs. nurture' study.
Try meeting some identical twins, it's the exact same thing.
Two, with an identical genetic baseline, all with a specific genetic defect, you can do comparative studies of different treatments. Since treatment on the genetic level is likely to be affected by the genetics of the individual being treated, a 'same' baseline allows for much more reasonable studies of treatment effectiveness.
I'd rather see computer models. Even with numerous identical subjects you still only have 1 set of genes, you are testing with a control, but one that isn't necessarily applicable in a real world setting.
Read "Brave New World", the technique described in the book is the exact same thing these guys are doing and prozac could probably soma a run for it's money. Now we have to consciously decide to not go that route, or do, it's our choice.
perhaps you misunderstood, when I said "people" I meant it in the exceedingly plural form, like in the millions. Like the 15-20 million people on TW cable, like the 16-20 million people on AOL, not the 50 folks that you hang with. Actually I think the promotion you are talking about is the best kind, but for a new site to attract enough people to obtain a critical mass of traffic it would take years to accumulate what AOL/TW can generate in 10 minutes.
This merger just makes it harder to compete in media content creation and distrubution, much harder.
Is a modified kernel that is only used by one entity considered a distribution?
no. If you don't put it "in the wild" then there's no one to ask for source. If you keep it in-house, everyone who uses it will have access. My guess is that the NSA will keep their verison VERY MUCH in-house. The way I read the GPL (for this topic) is that if there is no one to complain about not having the source for their binaries (as the case would be here) then there is no violation.
Anybody else see similarities between this story and the other "hoax" stories about a certain country that now controls the Panama Canal doing the same thing?
I think that the effect on the internet as a whole will be negligable at best. One of the writers above mentioned danger to niche sites. People who use those sites now won't stop, and given the rather broadscope of traditional media, and their ignorance on several subjects, niche sites will still be neccesary.
And how exactly are people going to "hear" of those niche sites? CNN has news, why go anywhere else. AOL has already digested this for me, it's feeding time. Want to promote that hot new start-up idea? "Not on my networks you won't." "We have a new media property? Well, spam CNN,CNNSI,SI,AOL,Healine News,(the list goes on for days) and we should get somebody" AOL is already a big believer in the spam approach, they won't stop now that they have even more ears and eyeballs. bah humbug, the whole things just chaps my hide.
if I remember my Boy Scouts experiences correctly, you can actually start the steel wool with the d-batteries from your flashlight. Smoldering steel wool is a great fire starter if you pick the right kindling.
to continue this meme, I saw a poll at one mass media website (sorry, I don't recall) asking "Does anyone see a downside to the AOL/TW merger?" This was included on a page with 2 links to articles talking about how good it was. So they offer a leading poll question, coupled with biased content, so tommorrow on Headline News you see that 70% of your peers can see no downside to the merger. Welcome to mass media in the 21st century.
totally right, I wish Linux were a good gaming platform, it just doesn't get enough support. I'll have a windows partition, and use it a lot, until this weakness is corrected. It is kind of a catch-22, no users, no support, less new users. 'course wit' Linux being on the up and up, more users, more support, more new users, more support, more users, repeat 10x, more users, GAMES!. Seriously though, this could be the year for it.
Can anybody comment(guess) on how much it adds to dev time to do a port/do 2 OSes on avg?
if ACs like you would log in, I could set my prefs to ignore ACs that aren't like you, dangit. Unless you really do have that much time on your hands, and are fighting both for good and evil.
yea, I wasn't sure who to attribute it to. I thought maybe Duke, but so many of them reminded me, I decided to give it to the whole team (and I never learned the names of the writers of the show)
Stay away from psyche tests and think realistically. If that 8 year old see the horse orgy AND HAS SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS (esp, someone that child trusts and respects), in however vague terms, it is a vastly different scenario than one in which the 8 year old has to come to terms with horse orgies with no outside assistance or guidance. I can't think of a scientific study that could differentitate or quanitatively measure the effect, so I don't want studies, and will never base my opinion on this subject on them.
The trauma comes from not being able to deal with a situation not the point of exposure. Avoiding that trauma comes from being able to deal with (i.e. comprehend rationally, if in a limited context) the event.
Crying at the death of Bambi's mom is not a good example because you are using a medium (cartoons with child like characters) and content that speaks on a childs level. pr0n would most likely not be understood on any level, thus leading to all sort of wild conclusions IF the child is left to figure it out without assistance. With a good Mom or Pop around all it would be is a sign that Mom and Dad need to explain what they were doing 8 years, 9 months ago.
both being from the South (a big state that can kick all your asses;) and knowing these types of folks, cracker is the right word (as in, "cracked in the head")
Slashdot Mirror
It's only called piracy because our current laws are not up to speed with the reality of the situation (~no copying or distrubution costs for either the producer or the consumer). And still it is only piracy if you make copes and SELL them. I don't call it piracy, I call it listening to music.
How many people die in the book? Will there be nudity? If this thing is touchy feely crap, I'm gonn puke. Hmmm, would Katz write touchy feely crap? aaaah whatever, tgif....
However, word of mouth on the internet (email especially) is a very powerful force. How else can you explain the Mahir phenomenon?
/. is, I doubt the response will be as good as it would be for something like this. E-mail friend marketing is only good for a momentary laugh, not a high-speed million dollar long term Internet business.
certain things can gain instant attention. Anybody seen the Hampsterdance? (on the TV *net commercial) or the Mahir you have referred to, featured on the Daily Show, no less. But, for a viable commercial entity this kind of stuff doesn't work. If I start spamming my friends telling them about how great
And who says the blanket spam/popup/banner ads crap that AOL does are all that effective anyway?
These guys and these guys and these folks, (and others that take more than 15 seconds to find) the basic consensus is that these types of ads work better, but annoy folks. Howver, newbies won't realize that these ads should be annoying, will accept them as normal, and outweigh the clued by a large enough margin that media providers like, oh, say, AOL, can ignore user compaints and keep painting my rare earth elements with crap.
Music is a whole 'nother story, I think we can win that one. And I agree with the big busines imploding idea, IBM is a great example. But, AOL owns ICQ, and Shoutcast, and Winamp (yes, I know about icecast, and *cq and XMMS). I've ranted about this topic enough (check my info page), so I'll stop now.
and it all goes into how much faith and realiance you put into the program your watching, the electronic signal that comes through your screen. if you really want to know what's going on, then go. if not you're not gonna go, then you gotta trust someone. but they never promised that they wouldn't alter the image.
uh oh, they didn't promise that they won't come to my house and kill me, should I be scared? So the only rational way to trust the media now, is to explicitly NOT trust them, then they must explicitly state they won't lie, back it up for a few years, then I can trust 'em again?
Actually I think that's a better way to approach media now. Don't give 'em the time of day until you see their sour^H^H^H^Hethics guidebook.
Rather himself weighed into the controversy Thursday in an interview with the New York Times, in which he said he regretted the TV trickery, saying it was ``a mistake.''
``At the very least we should have pointed out to viewers we were doing it,'' he said. ``I did not grasp the possible ethical implications of this and that was wrong on my part.'
So, Dan actually thinks its kinda "wrong" to lie to people? Wow, journalistic integrity at it's top.
CBS News President Andrew Heyward defended the use of such new technology
Meet Dan's boss.
Asked whether he believed it was deliberate deception on CBS's part, Heyward said: ``The answer is no, I don't think it was. This is part of the evolution of graphics. They get more and more sophisticated...it does raise new issues.''
What? You mean like ethical issues? Like, "Maybe we should tell people what they're seeing is fake" kind of issues?
and
And ABC News apologized a few years ago for a segment in which reporter Cokie Roberts was said to be reporting from Capitol Hill, when she was in fact in the network's Washington bureau in front of a photograph of the Capitol building.
Let's rephrase this, ABC apologized a few years ago when they lied to save a few bucks, after they got caught. Remember...
CBS is owned by CBS Corp. (NYSE:CBS - news) NBC is owned by General Electric Co. (NYSE:GE - news) and ABC by Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - news).
And all of these are responsible to their shareholders to maximize profits. Nothin' like saving millions with new technology!
This technology is real cute, until it's used to show some Chinese/Iraqi/Evil Empire of the Week troops killing 30 Americans in cold blood to ramp up public opinion to grab new resources for the starving childrn in this country.
/end wild knee jerk reaction
this is flamebait, not interesting. Who gave the 12 yr old Linux zealot mod. access? ;)
For one, you can create a significant population for a 'nature vs. nurture' study.
Try meeting some identical twins, it's the exact same thing.
Two, with an identical genetic baseline, all with a specific genetic defect, you can do comparative studies of different treatments. Since treatment on the genetic level is likely to be affected by the genetics of the individual being treated, a 'same' baseline allows for much more reasonable studies of treatment effectiveness.
I'd rather see computer models. Even with numerous identical subjects you still only have 1 set of genes, you are testing with a control, but one that isn't necessarily applicable in a real world setting.
Read "Brave New World", the technique described in the book is the exact same thing these guys are doing and prozac could probably soma a run for it's money. Now we have to consciously decide to not go that route, or do, it's our choice.
/. is the future of news, get used to it.
(no I'm not joking, peer review works great for this stuff, so does hearing a variety of opinions)
perhaps you misunderstood, when I said "people" I meant it in the exceedingly plural form, like in the millions. Like the 15-20 million people on TW cable, like the 16-20 million people on AOL, not the 50 folks that you hang with. Actually I think the promotion you are talking about is the best kind, but for a new site to attract enough people to obtain a critical mass of traffic it would take years to accumulate what AOL/TW can generate in 10 minutes.
This merger just makes it harder to compete in media content creation and distrubution, much harder.
Is a modified kernel that is only used by one entity considered a distribution?
no. If you don't put it "in the wild" then there's no one to ask for source. If you keep it in-house, everyone who uses it will have access. My guess is that the NSA will keep their verison VERY MUCH in-house. The way I read the GPL (for this topic) is that if there is no one to complain about not having the source for their binaries (as the case would be here) then there is no violation.
Anybody else see similarities between this story and the other "hoax" stories about a certain country that now controls the Panama Canal doing the same thing?
M$ isn't a technology company. They are a MARKETING company, this is where to majority of their innovation and successes have been.
I think that the effect on the internet as a whole will be negligable at best. One of the writers above mentioned danger to niche sites. People who use those sites now won't stop, and given the rather broadscope of traditional media, and their ignorance on several subjects, niche sites will still be neccesary.
And how exactly are people going to "hear" of those niche sites? CNN has news, why go anywhere else. AOL has already digested this for me, it's feeding time. Want to promote that hot new start-up idea? "Not on my networks you won't." "We have a new media property? Well, spam CNN,CNNSI,SI,AOL,Healine News,(the list goes on for days) and we should get somebody" AOL is already a big believer in the spam approach, they won't stop now that they have even more ears and eyeballs. bah humbug, the whole things just chaps my hide.
Is USENET an acronym, or simply capitalized for emphasis. This didn't tell me. Thursday is Curiosity Day.
if I remember my Boy Scouts experiences correctly, you can actually start the steel wool with the d-batteries from your flashlight. Smoldering steel wool is a great fire starter if you pick the right kindling.
to continue this meme, I saw a poll at one mass media website (sorry, I don't recall) asking "Does anyone see a downside to the AOL/TW merger?" This was included on a page with 2 links to articles talking about how good it was. So they offer a leading poll question, coupled with biased content, so tommorrow on Headline News you see that 70% of your peers can see no downside to the merger. Welcome to mass media in the 21st century.
It's years above what Office 97 was
:)
How many? Maybe 3?
It was hidden under the heading
Ins tall Soundblaster Live on Linux;=) google is your friend
good luck.
totally right, I wish Linux were a good gaming platform, it just doesn't get enough support. I'll have a windows partition, and use it a lot, until this weakness is corrected. It is kind of a catch-22, no users, no support, less new users. 'course wit' Linux being on the up and up, more users, more support, more new users, more support, more users, repeat 10x, more users, GAMES!. Seriously though, this could be the year for it.
Can anybody comment(guess) on how much it adds to dev time to do a port/do 2 OSes on avg?
if ACs like you would log in, I could set my prefs to ignore ACs that aren't like you, dangit. Unless you really do have that much time on your hands, and are fighting both for good and evil.
it's cause I have Karma to burn and forgot to check a box, FAQ it!
again.
there's no "r" in "doo".
binary eh, anybody see that FedEx commercial with the website designers...
.sig" button, hmmm..;)
"Binary riddles, people love those."
"It'll be obsolete by the time we walk out the doo, but that's o.k. We can come back and fix it."
--
Gotta work that geek-PR angle, I mean.."postulating"!?!?
--
:), sorry, I haven't flamed in a while, guess I need to play more Q3A. (now where's that "hide
yea, I wasn't sure who to attribute it to. I thought maybe Duke, but so many of them reminded me, I decided to give it to the whole team (and I never learned the names of the writers of the show)
Stay away from psyche tests and think realistically. If that 8 year old see the horse orgy AND HAS SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS (esp, someone that child trusts and respects), in however vague terms, it is a vastly different scenario than one in which the 8 year old has to come to terms with horse orgies with no outside assistance or guidance. I can't think of a scientific study that could differentitate or quanitatively measure the effect, so I don't want studies, and will never base my opinion on this subject on them.
The trauma comes from not being able to deal with a situation not the point of exposure. Avoiding that trauma comes from being able to deal with (i.e. comprehend rationally, if in a limited context) the event.
Crying at the death of Bambi's mom is not a good example because you are using a medium (cartoons with child like characters) and content that speaks on a childs level. pr0n would most likely not be understood on any level, thus leading to all sort of wild conclusions IF the child is left to figure it out without assistance. With a good Mom or Pop around all it would be is a sign that Mom and Dad need to explain what they were doing 8 years, 9 months ago.
both being from the South (a big state that can kick all your asses ;) and knowing these types of folks, cracker is the right word (as in, "cracked in the head")