I have no doubt you have a diverse political spectrum - for an American.
The context here is, of course, coverage of the US election. (Which begs the question of whether it wouldn't be a fine idea to cover at least world politics, if not national politics all over the world, in the new section.)
Actually, MPAA/RIAA might just stop messing around and start calculating the BIG damages. Next press release:
"It has long been established that most blank media is used for piracy. The legislatures have wisely acted to provide compensation to our rights holders for all blank media sold."
"However, we have been remiss in not realizing that, like blank media, network bandwidth is also mostly used for piracy. Accordingly, we are today introducing a bill to compensate our rights holders for the piracy that is certainly occurring over unlicensed bandwidth. A tax of $0.01/MB will be levied on all network transmissions except those originating directly from our licensed content distributors."
When calculating the bandwidth of a station wagon, don't forget to count the load time to get all that data loaded to the target computer. Online transfers usually get data all the way to destination, not just into the parking lot.
Isn't comparing various services that are within an order of magnitude of each other somewhat pointless? Who cares what color your apples are? The issue should be to switch fruits entirely.
Text only speed - modems
Streaming music and occassional background downloads - current broadband
Streaming video - 100Mbps
Here's hoping somebody starts pouring the orange juice soon.
You do know that USA is quite a bit more densely populated than Sweden, don't you? As a matter of fact the population density in USA is 45% greater than Sweden!
I love averages. Of course, like all northern scandanavian countries, the top half of Sweden basically empty. People are few and far between north of Gavle (~62 North). Not to mention the fact that Sweden has only 8 992 217 people total. (To be fair, big tracks of the American west are likewise empty.)
To make the comparison useful, what you do is start in the densest part of each country and count citizens, moving to progressively less dense sections. When you get down into the thin parts, say less than 10 people/sq km, stop. Now look at how many people were in the dense parts and how much area you had to cover to get them. That will give you a sense of how easy it is to achieve an "broadband penetration percentage" that looks good.
Can someone explain what the members of this set are and why?
{semi-expensive and certainly valuable (for a college student) stuff}
I'm trying to picture what in my dorm room would have been (b) certainly valuable, but only (a) semi-expensive? For instance, _my_ laptop was very expensive, but I'm pretty dubious about its value. And does stuff have different values for college students than for other people?
If the set had been {portable and resalable stuff}, I'd have understood.
Exactly. If the current approved voting method uses unencrypted fax machines (not STUs or some such thing), then emailing tiffs or pdfs around is not going to decrease security any.
No reason not to accept emailed votes on the same basis as faxed ones for the time being -- until a better, decently secure, system can be constructed and deployed.
'P2P does not stand for 'permission to pilfer,' Ashcroft said.
It's good to see that some one has finally explained to the USAG that P2P pilfering. P2P is a communication method like any other, for good or ill. Now, if he would just stop trying to outlaw it.
Your detractors don't see the economic drivers behind what you're suggesting. The demand side of the music marketplace consists of masses of people who want music -- that hasn't changed. The supply side of the music marketplace, on the other hand, is changing. It has had one model since the vinyl LP became ubiquitous, but cheap personal electronics are eroding the foundations of that model.
In the old model, the "music industry" contributed (i) means of recording, (ii) means of mass reproduction, (iii) means of distribution, and (iv) means of promotion. (The music itself has always come from the artists.) Currently, means of distribution are nearly free (e.g. p2p networks). Currently, means of mass reproduction are nearly free (e.g. copying files or burning CDs).
Currently, means of recording are becoming cheaper and cheaper as recording / mixing equipment drops in price relative to other goods. Viva la semiconductor revolution! Seriously, how expensive would it be today to produce a recording of the same quality as, for instance, the Beatles masters? That cost is within the reach of artists who have day jobs. It certainly doesn't require a multi-national corporation to pay the studio fees, not when the multi-nat demands a usurious contract signed in blood.
That eliminates 3 of the 4 things the "music industry" used to contribute to the supply of music. What about means of promotion? This is actually the biggest bill the "industry" used to pay for an artist. If the "industry" can be replaced as the promoter of music, then they become totally unnecessary. (It would help to get some real numbers from a real economist to understand the relative costs of promotion, production, and distribution. We're just speculating here.) Free distribution provides a little promotion on its own, but just word of mouth will not achieve the kind of promotion that an expensive marketing campaign does today. So, promotion is the problem we still need to work on. Here is a slight revision of you problem / solution lists reflecting who kept/keeps what money.
Current state of music market:-
Artist performs music
Industry spends cash recording and enhancing music in expensive studios.
Industry spends more cash distributing recordings to shops.
Industry spends far more cash promoting music. Music becomes popular.
Customers buy recordings.
Industry keeps (nearly all) revenues from recording sales.
Artist tours. Fans buy tickets.
Artist and venues split ticket revenue.
Some customers copy bought recordings for friends
Industry "loses" _potential_ recording sales.
Industry spends small amounts of cash on laws and lawsuits to stop copying.
Lots of unhappy customers.
More efficient state for music market:-
Artist performs music.
Artist records and enhances music using digital tools and independent studios.
Artist uploads recordings to web sites
People download / copy recordings for free.
Music becomes popular.
Artist tours. Fans buy tickets.
Artist and venues split ticket revenue.
Artist sells some recordings to customers who prefer this format.
Artist sells merchandise.
Industry now totally redundant - I think they already know this.
Few / no laws against copying are needed.
Lots of happy people.
In your new model, artists will get relatively the same money as in the old. However, the people will get lots more recorded music for far less money. So, where will the money that people used to spend on recordings go? Answer: the people will keep it instead of the Industry.
Contrary to what some of the replies have said, you're not being Polyanna here. An industry only exists if it is the cheapest producer of something people want. All we have to do is keep it legal for independent artists to make and distribute their own music and the "music industry" as we know it today will fall. We just don't need them.
Somebody go find an egg timer. As a requiem, we really should record the time it takes for the Cloud to be astroturfed, spammed, p0rned, and otherwise made to resemble the online equivalent of a univeristy-district telephone pole.
...gives me a +3 Informative moderation bonus on Slashdot. Actually that'd be a +4...
That's true; plus, it's not a "moderation bonus". It's a +4 Charisma bonus to his moderation check; such Charisma bonuses typically result in a +X Funny rating. Ratings of +X Informative are typically caused by Intelligence bonuses, while ratings of +X Insightful are typically caused by Wisdom bonuses. Oddly, when making a moderation check, a poster can choose to rely on any one of his Charisma, Intelligence, or Wisdom scores. (This is similar to choosing Str or Dex to resist a Trip attempt.) However, the poster cannot stack his Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom bonuses on the same moderation check. The DC of the check is set by the topic, the number of comments previously posted, and whether the poster is agreeing with of refuting one of the known Slashdot prejudices (e.g. Microsoft is evil).
I've never understood the notoriety of 1984. Brave New World does a better job of anticipating the outcomes of such a future without the overwhelming paranoia of 1984. Plus, Huxley's characters have some redeeming qualities, where Orwell seems convinced that all people have only a base nature.
Hear, hear! What receptors are they going to turn off next? First procrastination, then narcotics, then nicotine, then dial back the urge to eat. Then sex. In AIDS-ravaged nations, it'll sound reasonable to decrease the sex drive (aside from the present cost of gene therapy). What things that I currently enjoy will I be tempted to erradicate?
Plus, the process should work in the reverse, right? What activities will they want to enhance my response to? Music? Heinz ketchup? Watching television?
It finally gives literal meaning to the term "brain wash". You gotta wash that [desire] right outta your [brain].
this is a pretty nifty use of biometric technology, to key the person's fingerprint to locking & opening a locker.
Up to that point, it is nifty and it's not a rights problem.
...Slashdot... trying to turn this into some sorts of online rights issue.
It turns into a rights problem when visitors who thought they were getting a locker in fact get a database check. Even if such a check were "reasonable and necessary", it would still qualify as "awful and tragic". And, how can anyone trust that this data will ever go away?
"I believe when our Founding Fathers, with their wisdom and patriotism, wrote this Amendment, they knew what they were talking about. They knew what history was behind them and they wanted to ordain in this country that Congress, elected by the people, should not tell the people what religion they should have or what they should believe or what they should say or publish, and that is about it. It says no law, and that is what I believe it means."
Slashdot Mirror
I have no doubt you have a diverse political spectrum - for an American.
The context here is, of course, coverage of the US election. (Which begs the question of whether it wouldn't be a fine idea to cover at least world politics, if not national politics all over the world, in the new section.)
Not only is there contact information in the friendly article, there is also this little gem:
Actually, MPAA/RIAA might just stop messing around and start calculating the BIG damages. Next press release:
"It has long been established that most blank media is used for piracy. The legislatures have wisely acted to provide compensation to our rights holders for all blank media sold."
"However, we have been remiss in not realizing that, like blank media, network bandwidth is also mostly used for piracy. Accordingly, we are today introducing a bill to compensate our rights holders for the piracy that is certainly occurring over unlicensed bandwidth. A tax of $0.01/MB will be levied on all network transmissions except those originating directly from our licensed content distributors."
'This record speed of 6.63Gbps is equivalent to transferring a full-length DVD movie in four seconds.'
Yeah, that's the message we want to convey to the MPAA. Everyone knows the Internet2 is all about pirating DVDs.
You're pitching it wrong. What we tell the MPAA is, "See, with Internet2, you can sell a whole movie every 5 seconds."
When calculating the bandwidth of a station wagon, don't forget to count the load time to get all that data loaded to the target computer. Online transfers usually get data all the way to destination, not just into the parking lot.
Ah! My bad. That'll teach me to use 3 month old data.
Text only speed - modems
Streaming music and occassional background downloads - current broadband
Streaming video - 100Mbps
Here's hoping somebody starts pouring the orange juice soon.
You do know that USA is quite a bit more densely populated than Sweden, don't you? As a matter of fact the population density in USA is 45% greater than Sweden!
I love averages. Of course, like all northern scandanavian countries, the top half of Sweden basically empty. People are few and far between north of Gavle (~62 North). Not to mention the fact that Sweden has only 8 992 217 people total. (To be fair, big tracks of the American west are likewise empty.)
To make the comparison useful, what you do is start in the densest part of each country and count citizens, moving to progressively less dense sections. When you get down into the thin parts, say less than 10 people/sq km, stop. Now look at how many people were in the dense parts and how much area you had to cover to get them. That will give you a sense of how easy it is to achieve an "broadband penetration percentage" that looks good.
That said, the U.S. should get its butt in gear.
...see that they worked for SCO ... and exclude them from consideration for hire for that reason alone?
It's a little like wondering who has the Alien in their chest? You know that an Alien is in at least one of the people still at SCO.
What you don't know when interviewing some one who isn't at SCO anymore is: are they a survivor or a carrier.
Can someone explain what the members of this set are and why?
{semi-expensive and certainly valuable (for a college student) stuff}
I'm trying to picture what in my dorm room would have been (b) certainly valuable, but only (a) semi-expensive? For instance, _my_ laptop was very expensive, but I'm pretty dubious about its value. And does stuff have different values for college students than for other people?
If the set had been {portable and resalable stuff}, I'd have understood.
Exactly. If the current approved voting method uses unencrypted fax machines (not STUs or some such thing), then emailing tiffs or pdfs around is not going to decrease security any.
No reason not to accept emailed votes on the same basis as faxed ones for the time being -- until a better, decently secure, system can be constructed and deployed.
'P2P does not stand for 'permission to pilfer,' Ashcroft said.
It's good to see that some one has finally explained to the USAG that P2P pilfering. P2P is a communication method like any other, for good or ill. Now, if he would just stop trying to outlaw it.
In the old model, the "music industry" contributed (i) means of recording, (ii) means of mass reproduction, (iii) means of distribution, and (iv) means of promotion. (The music itself has always come from the artists.) Currently, means of distribution are nearly free (e.g. p2p networks). Currently, means of mass reproduction are nearly free (e.g. copying files or burning CDs).
Currently, means of recording are becoming cheaper and cheaper as recording / mixing equipment drops in price relative to other goods. Viva la semiconductor revolution! Seriously, how expensive would it be today to produce a recording of the same quality as, for instance, the Beatles masters? That cost is within the reach of artists who have day jobs. It certainly doesn't require a multi-national corporation to pay the studio fees, not when the multi-nat demands a usurious contract signed in blood.
That eliminates 3 of the 4 things the "music industry" used to contribute to the supply of music. What about means of promotion? This is actually the biggest bill the "industry" used to pay for an artist. If the "industry" can be replaced as the promoter of music, then they become totally unnecessary. (It would help to get some real numbers from a real economist to understand the relative costs of promotion, production, and distribution. We're just speculating here.) Free distribution provides a little promotion on its own, but just word of mouth will not achieve the kind of promotion that an expensive marketing campaign does today. So, promotion is the problem we still need to work on. Here is a slight revision of you problem / solution lists reflecting who kept/keeps what money.
Current state of music market:-
More efficient state for music market:-
In your new model, artists will get relatively the same money as in the old. However, the people will get lots more recorded music for far less money. So, where will the money that people used to spend on recordings go? Answer: the people will keep it instead of the Industry.
Contrary to what some of the replies have said, you're not being Polyanna here. An industry only exists if it is the cheapest producer of something people want. All we have to do is keep it legal for independent artists to make and distribute their own music and the "music industry" as we know it today will fall. We just don't need them.
Somebody go find an egg timer. As a requiem, we really should record the time it takes for the Cloud to be astroturfed, spammed, p0rned, and otherwise made to resemble the online equivalent of a univeristy-district telephone pole.
Requiescat In Pace, Nebula.
...gives me a +3 Informative moderation bonus on Slashdot.
Actually that'd be a +4...
That's true; plus, it's not a "moderation bonus". It's a +4 Charisma bonus to his moderation check; such Charisma bonuses typically result in a +X Funny rating. Ratings of +X Informative are typically caused by Intelligence bonuses, while ratings of +X Insightful are typically caused by Wisdom bonuses. Oddly, when making a moderation check, a poster can choose to rely on any one of his Charisma, Intelligence, or Wisdom scores. (This is similar to choosing Str or Dex to resist a Trip attempt.) However, the poster cannot stack his Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom bonuses on the same moderation check. The DC of the check is set by the topic, the number of comments previously posted, and whether the poster is agreeing with of refuting one of the known Slashdot prejudices (e.g. Microsoft is evil).
moderation check = d20 + karma bonus + an ability bonus
. . . Yes, I just got home from GenCon Indy. How did you know?
With my eyes traing by Slashdot to skip the bracketted link, I read,
FOR SAKE, STOP THE WHALING!!!
Actually, it's a pretty good plan: let's hang up the harpoons and break out the booze!
...the legal equivalent of a logical tautology...A no win situation for SCO.
Where ah come from y'all, we call that, "havin' em over a barrel" -- no matter which way it rolls, they're headin' fer a fall.
Because there are websites that won't let you in unless you make it think you are using Internet Explorer.
Not all websites are fooled by this. For instance, Expedia refuses to allow disgused Opera users.
Wired's usage is wrong.
You would think, of all people, that wired would recognize the importance of differentiating proper nouns from ordinary ones.
18,800 x ~0.3 = ~5,600 jobs in the U.S.
Still good, but we could have done without the inflation.
I've never understood the notoriety of 1984. Brave New World does a better job of anticipating the outcomes of such a future without the overwhelming paranoia of 1984. Plus, Huxley's characters have some redeeming qualities, where Orwell seems convinced that all people have only a base nature.
Hear, hear! What receptors are they going to turn off next? First procrastination, then narcotics, then nicotine, then dial back the urge to eat. Then sex. In AIDS-ravaged nations, it'll sound reasonable to decrease the sex drive (aside from the present cost of gene therapy). What things that I currently enjoy will I be tempted to erradicate?
Plus, the process should work in the reverse, right? What activities will they want to enhance my response to? Music? Heinz ketchup? Watching television?
It finally gives literal meaning to the term "brain wash". You gotta wash that [desire] right outta your [brain].
Up to that point, it is nifty and it's not a rights problem.
It turns into a rights problem when visitors who thought they were getting a locker in fact get a database check. Even if such a check were "reasonable and necessary", it would still qualify as "awful and tragic". And, how can anyone trust that this data will ever go away?
The copyright ferret should be named Hugo Black.
"I believe when our Founding Fathers, with their wisdom and patriotism, wrote this Amendment, they knew what they were talking about. They knew what history was behind them and they wanted to ordain in this country that Congress, elected by the people, should not tell the people what religion they should have or what they should believe or what they should say or publish, and that is about it. It says no law, and that is what I believe it means."
No, not "Judge Dread." El Dread.
As in, "I'm afraid if Congress keeps going like this, copyright will last forever -- 20 years at a time.