Well, I think the one thing that the digital age, and the concept of computer "data" has done, is to muddy the distinction between "information" and "entertainment" (or "content", "presentation", "expression", and the like). Although an MP3 file, for instance, may be considered "information" or "data" to a computer -- the MP3 player app is "informed" how to instruct the sound card -- but to a human, the actual "information" in the song is a very small slice of the actual content. What's the "information" in many popular music songs? For pure informative value, all you're often getting is "It hurt the songwriter, badly, when I left him/her." I use MP3s and music as an example, but most creative media apply.
Of course, there may be informative examples of certain concepts in the lyrics or tune of the song, and these are validly "information" in their context, but to readily apply the values of open information exchange to the entire expressive application, be it a book, movie, song, or visual work, just creates conflicts, schisms, and misunderstandings, similar to what you've brought up in your post.
Like I say in my signature: "Information wants to be free. Entertainment wants to be paid." (and ignoring the snarky conclusion.) In the US copyright system, information often is free, by way of Fair Use doctrine. (There are exceptions: The database-copyright legislation attempts a while back tried to take parts of that away, and things like the DMCA and PATRIOT restrict certain types of information.) Although I am not free to copy or perform the latest blockbuster movie or book -- I'm not the one that thought it up -- I can give a plot synopsis, review, and quote relevant passages until the cows come home, because that's not expression, that's information.
A lot of the mis-bandying-about of the "Free information!" comes from the simple fact that, well, the information really isn't the interesting part. Unfortunately, those who wish to be entertained will either have to entertain themselves, or trade their skills and wares to someone who is capable of entertainment.
One big thing that needs to get balanced out is the role of the FDA. On one hand, I think it would be unwise to abolish the FDA, and go completely without testing or certification. On the other hand, though, strict FDA regulations create a barrier to smaller outfits, as well as constrict the types of possible cures and medications.
How about this? - Drug companies must publish the results of any tests they perform on a drug, but they are not required to perform tests (beyond a limited "not rat poison" test, perhaps). For common drugs, the popular press could sort things out, and for specialized medicine, your trained medical advisor would help you make the treatment decision based on the ready information. If a company misrepresents its testing, or withholds known information of a flawed product, they are legally liable when things go wrong. Insurance companies, looking out for their own interests, would end up playing the role of the FDA in keeping people honest.
Of course, the system's all too entrenched anyway, so there's not much use talking about it on/.
Blogs' improvement over webpages is that it's amazingly simple to build and maintain the page, meaning that nearly anyone with half a brain can get a "write-mode" Internet presence that looks good. Today's blogs would have just been yesterday's seizure-inducing, flashing, malformed Geocities page (if it existed at all).
Podcasting isn't all that revolutionary in its parts, but it was more of a chemical reaction among the technologies of web audio (and the bandwidth to carry it), RSS with Enclosures and automated downloaders, (to some extent) portable media players, and the content, personalities, and zealotry to put it all together. Sure, you could do the same thing years ago, and many did, but static-file, homebrew "Internet Radio" never really took off until the method got solidified into a simple, standardized flow, and got the "pass-it-on" mentality that made a lot of listeners into podcasters themselves.
Perhaps less hard work (or more luxury) is preferable to more kids for some people. Sure, it's counter-genetic, but in the rapidly-populating world we live in, it might not be such a bad idea.
As for the poorest people having kids, well, although everyone down to the terminally poor can pull it off, having kids isn't the problem. Properly bringing kids up is the thing that takes all the work, time, and money.
And I'll die when I try to ride it into a major thouroughfare for kicks on my lunch hour.
Re:This is why you have monopolies.
on
Pay vs. Happiness
·
· Score: 1
Microsoft is, to some degree. They could get their ass handed to them by Apple if they screw up too badly over a long time. As for OPEC and RIAA, they're trade organizations, not businesses. The phone companies, in deregulated areas, are. In monopolized areas, it's kind of a moot point, since "they" are there, and "you" aren't "them".
That said, they're all still forced to work or die. If any of these organizations just sat down and did absolutely stone dead nothing, they'd be replaced.
Did the 0.x version expire? If not, I'd hesitate to call it "bait and switch", since you still have a working, albeit lower-versioned, copy. If not, and it's a forced-timeout beta... yeah, that's kinda crappy.
What search terms would you be using to get that, if you weren't searching for whiny drama pages? "Anorexic", maybe, but that's about it.
Personally, I find those "Post the question, pay for the answer" sites to be the biggest PITA for Google crud. (Well, that and keyword-spamming pages, but that goes without saying.) Granted, my searches tend toward the technical side. I've rarely come up with blog links in search results (usually looking for dumb-net-meme-of-the-hour or current-events info), and those often get me what I need to know in, at least, one or two clicks.
On a basic level, though, I'd say it's the nature of all motivation. No sane being would makes an expenditure unless there is either some sort of percieved direct or indirect benefit, or a neutralization of a negative situation. Be it physiological (endorphins, etc.) or social (rising tide lifts all ships, maybe I'll need it someday, social pressure).
...
Of course, there are some theories out there that attribute this on a wider scope ("relations" along with "self"), but it's a similar vein.
Funny... I often find 128 MP3 to sound like a fishtank, and can spot most 128s right off. Granted, some that have been pre-tweaked (with compression, band filtering, etc) to prep them for compression can escape as "perfectly lo-fi" without warble or artifacts.
Of course, move me up to even 192, and it takes an exceptional song for me to notice. My preferred format is LAME VBR, qval 2, 32-320kbps, usually averaging about 196-256k.
I've heard (somewhere or other) that people with worse hearing can actually hear MP3 artifacts better, since they can't hear the higher frequencies, that would normally mask the holes from the lost sonic data, as well.
Slashdot Mirror
It might be good... it might be bad... but it's not as trivial as everyone makes it out to be.
All the above, and it gets street cred, Slashdot links, etc.
Well, I think the one thing that the digital age, and the concept of computer "data" has done, is to muddy the distinction between "information" and "entertainment" (or "content", "presentation", "expression", and the like). Although an MP3 file, for instance, may be considered "information" or "data" to a computer -- the MP3 player app is "informed" how to instruct the sound card -- but to a human, the actual "information" in the song is a very small slice of the actual content. What's the "information" in many popular music songs? For pure informative value, all you're often getting is "It hurt the songwriter, badly, when I left him/her." I use MP3s and music as an example, but most creative media apply.
Of course, there may be informative examples of certain concepts in the lyrics or tune of the song, and these are validly "information" in their context, but to readily apply the values of open information exchange to the entire expressive application, be it a book, movie, song, or visual work, just creates conflicts, schisms, and misunderstandings, similar to what you've brought up in your post.
Like I say in my signature: "Information wants to be free. Entertainment wants to be paid." (and ignoring the snarky conclusion.) In the US copyright system, information often is free, by way of Fair Use doctrine. (There are exceptions: The database-copyright legislation attempts a while back tried to take parts of that away, and things like the DMCA and PATRIOT restrict certain types of information.) Although I am not free to copy or perform the latest blockbuster movie or book -- I'm not the one that thought it up -- I can give a plot synopsis, review, and quote relevant passages until the cows come home, because that's not expression, that's information.
A lot of the mis-bandying-about of the "Free information!" comes from the simple fact that, well, the information really isn't the interesting part. Unfortunately, those who wish to be entertained will either have to entertain themselves, or trade their skills and wares to someone who is capable of entertainment.
One big thing that needs to get balanced out is the role of the FDA. On one hand, I think it would be unwise to abolish the FDA, and go completely without testing or certification. On the other hand, though, strict FDA regulations create a barrier to smaller outfits, as well as constrict the types of possible cures and medications.
/.
How about this? - Drug companies must publish the results of any tests they perform on a drug, but they are not required to perform tests (beyond a limited "not rat poison" test, perhaps). For common drugs, the popular press could sort things out, and for specialized medicine, your trained medical advisor would help you make the treatment decision based on the ready information. If a company misrepresents its testing, or withholds known information of a flawed product, they are legally liable when things go wrong. Insurance companies, looking out for their own interests, would end up playing the role of the FDA in keeping people honest.
Of course, the system's all too entrenched anyway, so there's not much use talking about it on
Their insurance company might.
And web pages are glorified HTTP responses.
Blogs' improvement over webpages is that it's amazingly simple to build and maintain the page, meaning that nearly anyone with half a brain can get a "write-mode" Internet presence that looks good. Today's blogs would have just been yesterday's seizure-inducing, flashing, malformed Geocities page (if it existed at all).
Podcasting isn't all that revolutionary in its parts, but it was more of a chemical reaction among the technologies of web audio (and the bandwidth to carry it), RSS with Enclosures and automated downloaders, (to some extent) portable media players, and the content, personalities, and zealotry to put it all together. Sure, you could do the same thing years ago, and many did, but static-file, homebrew "Internet Radio" never really took off until the method got solidified into a simple, standardized flow, and got the "pass-it-on" mentality that made a lot of listeners into podcasters themselves.
I see... a consultancy in your friend's future.
Perhaps less hard work (or more luxury) is preferable to more kids for some people. Sure, it's counter-genetic, but in the rapidly-populating world we live in, it might not be such a bad idea.
As for the poorest people having kids, well, although everyone down to the terminally poor can pull it off, having kids isn't the problem. Properly bringing kids up is the thing that takes all the work, time, and money.
I'd like a rolling chair, thanks.
And I'll die when I try to ride it into a major thouroughfare for kicks on my lunch hour.
Microsoft is, to some degree. They could get their ass handed to them by Apple if they screw up too badly over a long time. As for OPEC and RIAA, they're trade organizations, not businesses. The phone companies, in deregulated areas, are. In monopolized areas, it's kind of a moot point, since "they" are there, and "you" aren't "them".
That said, they're all still forced to work or die. If any of these organizations just sat down and did absolutely stone dead nothing, they'd be replaced.
Perhaps we all could agree on "moderation"?
Still, though, it's less than a Slashdotting.
Then you rewrite the link to drop the 8090, and go to the original page, which is not Slashdotted.
Did the 0.x version expire? If not, I'd hesitate to call it "bait and switch", since you still have a working, albeit lower-versioned, copy. If not, and it's a forced-timeout beta... yeah, that's kinda crappy.
So all this means is that, in the FBI-run future, deviant porn will just need to have more storyline.
Yeah, but... was there a waiver?
Produced or distributed within California?
Taking inflation into account?
About that "market". You know, that does include sellers, right? I swear, arguments like that just deserve a RIAA wake-up letter.
Such as?
I've seen other portable music players, other player apps, and other digital-download sites. iTMS, iTunes, and iPod are not rare or exclusive.
No, but they shouldn't be standing in your way when you try to write one yourself. With the DMCA and DRMed CDs, however, that's what's happening.
What search terms would you be using to get that, if you weren't searching for whiny drama pages? "Anorexic", maybe, but that's about it.
Personally, I find those "Post the question, pay for the answer" sites to be the biggest PITA for Google crud. (Well, that and keyword-spamming pages, but that goes without saying.) Granted, my searches tend toward the technical side. I've rarely come up with blog links in search results (usually looking for dumb-net-meme-of-the-hour or current-events info), and those often get me what I need to know in, at least, one or two clicks.
Try Googling for "laser eggs terrorism".
Oh, I'm sure that'll put me on a watchlist.
On a basic level, though, I'd say it's the nature of all motivation. No sane being would makes an expenditure unless there is either some sort of percieved direct or indirect benefit, or a neutralization of a negative situation. Be it physiological (endorphins, etc.) or social (rising tide lifts all ships, maybe I'll need it someday, social pressure).
...
Of course, there are some theories out there that attribute this on a wider scope ("relations" along with "self"), but it's a similar vein.
Funny... I often find 128 MP3 to sound like a fishtank, and can spot most 128s right off. Granted, some that have been pre-tweaked (with compression, band filtering, etc) to prep them for compression can escape as "perfectly lo-fi" without warble or artifacts.
Of course, move me up to even 192, and it takes an exceptional song for me to notice. My preferred format is LAME VBR, qval 2, 32-320kbps, usually averaging about 196-256k.
I've heard (somewhere or other) that people with worse hearing can actually hear MP3 artifacts better, since they can't hear the higher frequencies, that would normally mask the holes from the lost sonic data, as well.