In this case, Hulu is to full price theaters as Netflix is to dollar theaters.
Since Fox (who jointly owns Hulu) actually holds the copyright and distribution rights, it's not directly comparable to the theater situation. It's more akin to television networks, where the networks themselves hold exclusive distribution rights: Fox will air their episodes on their television network, exclusively, and they provide no option for their competitor networks to air that show at the same time. After some time, however, they may sell the rights to air their shows to other networks.
Amazon has both the pay-per-episode model and the Netflix-clone that Prime subscribers get. I was referring to Prime.
The only thing extra that Prime offers, in the video realm, is access to some older content without paying per episode. I'm not aware of Prime offering access to any new content without asking for extra payment. I have Prime, and it looks like they want $2 per episode ($35/season) for the last (current?) season of "New Girl".
I never said anything about boring people. If you need to actually present something instead of just handing out a document, then you should focus on presenting and not just showing text in the most inefficient format possible and then proceeding to read it from the screen.
In my field, that means showing the plots of your data instead of a wall of text describing your interpretation of them (and then reading that wall of text). If you're not interacting with your audience then you're not aware of how well you're delivering the information.
The point of a presentation is to deliver information by speaking. The point of a presentation aid like Powerpoint is to help you show things that you can't say or emphasize things that you can say. If you're just a talking head reading your slides out loud for the presumably literate audience, then you're just wasting everybody's time.
If you can't be bothered to efficiently use a medium, then proceed to blame that ineptitude on your audience, try again.
I wasn't comparing parts of the east coast to other parts. I only singled out the states I did because the post I responded to mentioned 'BostiYorkDCadelphia'.
Most of the US is largely unoccupied and I was trying to argue that even the relatively densely populated east coast isn't a continuous suburb but has huge amounts of unoccupied land. The poster above the one I responded to was saying basically the same thing. I think the conversation got derailed at some point.
"Exclusivity" and "the royalties are cheaper" describe entirely different things.
From your example, "New Girl" is distributed by 21st Century Fox (indirectly through subsidiaries) and Hulu is a joint venture between 21st Century Fox and several other media companies. One of the companies that owns Hulu also owns "New Girl". There is no evidence that new episodes of "New Girl" are available at any price to Netflix (a stream-as-you-like service that competes directly with Hulu, as opposed to Amazon's pay-per-episode model).
If exclusivity is in play, the number of revenue streams being tapped has no impact on the availability of certain media. Fox is paying itself royalties for the new episodes, anyway. I'm sure that it must remain profitable for them to keep doing it, but by granting itself exclusive distribution rights it isn't competing on even ground with Netflix. This isn't an apples to apples comparison.
Actually, the problem isn't Powerpoint or presentations. The problem is people who do not know how to create or give good presentations.
The simplest rule of thumb is to minimize the number of words on the slides. It keeps the presenter and the audience from just reading the slides and forces the presenter to actually engage with the audience.
If they removed the ability to insert text into Powerpoint slides, the workplace would instantly become a better place. (Really, people would just paste Word documents into slides or use more of those stupid clipart icons, but it would be better for one stupid meeting's worth.)
Because it's a small state that contains Baltimore and a bunch of the DC population. Outside of those areas it has much lower density. Perhaps "overall" wasn't the best choice of words, but averaging the density of a whole state with dense cities gives the impression of overall high density while it is actually very heterogeneous.
To be honest, my unfounded speculation is that the subscription fees alone are enough to cover the operational costs plus a respectable profit for Hulu Plus (and Amazon/Netflix when they aren't being squeezed by the media companies). I think that the advertising revenue is pure gravy and that they'll never give it up because of the licensing exclusivity that they hold (=they can) and their longstanding partnership with advertisers.
Some of us are willing to pay (with actual money, not eyeball-time or personal information) for commercial-free media. It's only the people that are constantly chasing "free" that should have to put up with the shock-and-awe advertising campaigns.
Paying for access, only to also be subjected to advertising, is bullshit. I would gladly pay Hulu to cover the share that they're getting from advertisers, but I'll pay them exactly nothing if I can't lose the advertising altogether.
In the case of Hulu Plus (or cable TV), subscribers are never offered the opportunity to foot the whole bill.
The subscription + advertising model of Hulu Plus and cable TV are due to the advantages of being able to derive income from two distinct non-communicating parties. Since Hulu is owned and run directly by the media networks, it's not surprising that they're keeping the same business model. Since advertising and commercials are the foundation of their entire empire, I'd be surprised if they ever offered access to their content entirely commercial-free.
Frank is a deeper fellow than all but a few really grasp.
His books were largely philosophical treatises and it's so often disappointing to talk with people who can't see past the superficial stories that he uses to explore an element of philosophy. I'm surprised that anyone can get through the entirety of Dune without that dawning on them, but it becomes much more clear when you start reading his other works (especially those not set in sci fi settings).
Because the population of people that own EVs is drastically smaller than the population of people that don't own EVs. Current EV owners represent the self-selected group of people for which owning an EV is a better choice (and can afford to purchase a new car). That the vast majority of people haven't walked away from ICE cars should be an indicator that they are not an appropriate choice for most people. (And I say this as a satisfied EV owner. It works for me, but not for everybody.)
Your statement makes just as much sense as saying that there are people in Venice who own a boat and walked away from cars, so boats obviously present much less hassle than cars. My neighbor who started a roofing company replaced his sedan with a pickup truck and hasn't looked back; pickup trucks must present far fewer hassles than sedans. Do you understand context?
I just wondered if there was any good way to protect the "login ticket" (the mail containing the one-time-use code) from interception in the 24 hours between when it is sent and the expiration time that we store.
For account creation, you can do this by requiring that the user authenticate with their username and password to use the "login ticket". If they know all of the authentication details and have control of the email account, there's really no way to distinguish them from a legitimate user (from your limited perspective). That said, acquiring all of the account details (including the password) and gaining access to the user's email account in a short time window represents an attack that's only likely for an account on a very important system and you (I) wouldn't deploy such a system with email as the only means of verification.
Things are more difficult for password reset requests because the user doesn't know their login details, but that's a different scenario from the account generation one. You have to make security compromises in the name of convenience if you want a user to be able to reset their password from a link in an email alone.
My site, on account creation, generates a password and sends it to you in email in cleartext before putting it in the DB. In that email is a link to reset the password; you can't log into the rest of the site until you've done so. The updated password (and the original) are stored encrypted in the DB.
If anyone has a better suggestion, I'm all ears.
Seriously? Let the user enter their own password at account creation and send them an email with a link (containing a random hash that's indexed to that user in the DB) to verify the email address (if that's even a necessary step... it isn't always).
Why would you need to generate a password for them, especially if you're going to email it plaintext and make them change it anyway? What possible benefit does that serve?
Well, here's a good place to start. RC4 has a number of vulnerabilities and while each of them can be mitigated to a certain extent (changing keys, discarding the beginning of streams, etc), the confidence is low that implemented systems will successfully avoid all of them and not open up new vulnerabilities in the process.
3DES isn't horridly broken. With the most commonly used keying option, it's vulnerable to a meet-in-the-middle attack, but it still provides 112 bit security. That'll start looking a little lean in the coming years, but it's still a beast to brute force.
On the other hand, RC4, SSLv3, and TLS1.0 are actually broken.
WTF have your shares got to do with your desire to deliberately trash the life savings of millions of taxi drivers in the western world?. They entered into a contract with the government...
Typically, taxi medallions aren't sold by the government anymore. They're typically sold by their previous holders and the high prices reflect their scarcity and perceived value. The market decides this value (even when they're auctioned off by the state), so there isn't any guarantee that they'll maintain that value. Any contracts that exist say nothing about limiting the supply or compensating medallion-holders for any speculative prices they paid. Buying a medallion for $800k is just as speculative as buying an $800k house or $800k worth of stock. There are no government guarantees that they will maintain value.
tl;dr... The economics of the taxi medallion situation are extremely similar to shares in a company. The "contracts" that you're referring to don't exist (at least in the form that you image).
The so called RDF Is a simply a trustworthy brand. A brand is a promise of quality, and even though they aren't perfect, they do deliver better quality than any other manufacturer. They deliver on their promise. They beat all other companies in customer satisfaction surveys year in year out.
In our contemporary world where any sort of "promise of quality" is seen as quaint and most companies see their established brand names as something to be cashed in for executive bonuses, people are trained to not give any weight at all to brands. See the AC response for a great example of that.
In fact, i would very much like to see relevant & useful ads. Right now, almost none of the ads i see are useful for me.
You would very much like to see relevant & useful ads, or you would very much like to stop seeing irrelevant & useless ads?
Because while the latter is true for me and most of the people that I know, the former is not quite so popular and doesn't necessarily follow from the latter. A much more palatable way to see fewer irrelevant & useless ads would be to stop seeing so many ads altogether. The more Google's hand touches things, the less likely that is to ever happen.
Perhaps a huge component of "politeness" is the ability to personally identify with the people around you in a significant way. Most of Northern Europe has a remarkable cultural homogeneity. Denmark, for example, is occupied by around 90% people of Danish descent, and even the 10% is a relatively recent phenomenon. Even the religion of Denmark is homogeneous, with the census reporting 80% belonging to Church of Denmark. The rest of Northern Europe is similarly homogeneous, even including the UK.
So often your countryfolk seem brusque at best and just plain rude a lot of the time.
The rudest people I've ever met in my life have all been European. I'm a very polite person, so I presume it's because they knew that I was American and were unable to stir up any empathy for somebody so culturally different and "other". Perhaps it isn't valid to take your trans-cultural interaction as an accurate representation of intra-cultural interactions.
"Average score" is a stupid metric for comparing ratings anyway. Here's a little discussion about several different utterly wrong ways to make sense of ratings, "average score" being #2.
Your "average score" would rate a product with a single 5 star rating higher than one with 45,000 ratings averaging out to 4.999. Their "proprietary algorithm" is likely to be more useful to everybody than a bunk rating system like "average score".
Anyway, if all of the ratings go up, then you just continue to compare them to each other like you did before. It's not like anyone bases purchases on the absolute star rating of any particular product.
And they most definitely DO NOT need continuous access. The 'software' you're speaking about is simply a set of scripts to handle the domain ownership verification and certificate issue. It doesn't need access to anything but your HTTPD configuration files and/or DNS.
That's not entirely true, at least in the long term. Domain ownership verification could be done entirely through the configuration files or through access to the served content. They claim to handle revocation and reissue of certificates through their site as well, which is going to require at least some sort of polling from your server.
Can you just request certificate signing from them, though?
It looks like they really want to run their software on your server. Software which, while open source, has access to much of your system and a continuous connection to their server.
Re:Excellent. Now how about High Fructose Corn Syr
on
FDA Bans Trans Fat
·
· Score: 1
What exactly do you think connects the intestine to the liver?
Slashdot Mirror
In this case, Hulu is to full price theaters as Netflix is to dollar theaters.
Since Fox (who jointly owns Hulu) actually holds the copyright and distribution rights, it's not directly comparable to the theater situation. It's more akin to television networks, where the networks themselves hold exclusive distribution rights: Fox will air their episodes on their television network, exclusively, and they provide no option for their competitor networks to air that show at the same time. After some time, however, they may sell the rights to air their shows to other networks.
Amazon has both the pay-per-episode model and the Netflix-clone that Prime subscribers get. I was referring to Prime.
The only thing extra that Prime offers, in the video realm, is access to some older content without paying per episode. I'm not aware of Prime offering access to any new content without asking for extra payment. I have Prime, and it looks like they want $2 per episode ($35/season) for the last (current?) season of "New Girl".
I never said anything about boring people. If you need to actually present something instead of just handing out a document, then you should focus on presenting and not just showing text in the most inefficient format possible and then proceeding to read it from the screen.
In my field, that means showing the plots of your data instead of a wall of text describing your interpretation of them (and then reading that wall of text). If you're not interacting with your audience then you're not aware of how well you're delivering the information.
The point of a presentation is to deliver information by speaking. The point of a presentation aid like Powerpoint is to help you show things that you can't say or emphasize things that you can say. If you're just a talking head reading your slides out loud for the presumably literate audience, then you're just wasting everybody's time.
If you can't be bothered to efficiently use a medium, then proceed to blame that ineptitude on your audience, try again.
I wasn't comparing parts of the east coast to other parts. I only singled out the states I did because the post I responded to mentioned 'BostiYorkDCadelphia'.
Most of the US is largely unoccupied and I was trying to argue that even the relatively densely populated east coast isn't a continuous suburb but has huge amounts of unoccupied land. The poster above the one I responded to was saying basically the same thing. I think the conversation got derailed at some point.
"Exclusivity" and "the royalties are cheaper" describe entirely different things.
From your example, "New Girl" is distributed by 21st Century Fox (indirectly through subsidiaries) and Hulu is a joint venture between 21st Century Fox and several other media companies. One of the companies that owns Hulu also owns "New Girl". There is no evidence that new episodes of "New Girl" are available at any price to Netflix (a stream-as-you-like service that competes directly with Hulu, as opposed to Amazon's pay-per-episode model).
If exclusivity is in play, the number of revenue streams being tapped has no impact on the availability of certain media. Fox is paying itself royalties for the new episodes, anyway. I'm sure that it must remain profitable for them to keep doing it, but by granting itself exclusive distribution rights it isn't competing on even ground with Netflix. This isn't an apples to apples comparison.
Actually, the problem isn't Powerpoint or presentations. The problem is people who do not know how to create or give good presentations.
The simplest rule of thumb is to minimize the number of words on the slides. It keeps the presenter and the audience from just reading the slides and forces the presenter to actually engage with the audience.
If they removed the ability to insert text into Powerpoint slides, the workplace would instantly become a better place. (Really, people would just paste Word documents into slides or use more of those stupid clipart icons, but it would be better for one stupid meeting's worth.)
Because it's a small state that contains Baltimore and a bunch of the DC population. Outside of those areas it has much lower density. Perhaps "overall" wasn't the best choice of words, but averaging the density of a whole state with dense cities gives the impression of overall high density while it is actually very heterogeneous.
To be honest, my unfounded speculation is that the subscription fees alone are enough to cover the operational costs plus a respectable profit for Hulu Plus (and Amazon/Netflix when they aren't being squeezed by the media companies). I think that the advertising revenue is pure gravy and that they'll never give it up because of the licensing exclusivity that they hold (=they can) and their longstanding partnership with advertisers.
Some of us are willing to pay (with actual money, not eyeball-time or personal information) for commercial-free media. It's only the people that are constantly chasing "free" that should have to put up with the shock-and-awe advertising campaigns.
Paying for access, only to also be subjected to advertising, is bullshit. I would gladly pay Hulu to cover the share that they're getting from advertisers, but I'll pay them exactly nothing if I can't lose the advertising altogether.
In the case of Hulu Plus (or cable TV), subscribers are never offered the opportunity to foot the whole bill.
The subscription + advertising model of Hulu Plus and cable TV are due to the advantages of being able to derive income from two distinct non-communicating parties. Since Hulu is owned and run directly by the media networks, it's not surprising that they're keeping the same business model. Since advertising and commercials are the foundation of their entire empire, I'd be surprised if they ever offered access to their content entirely commercial-free.
Most of the states that 'BostiYorkDCadelphia' sit on are mostly suburb.
MA maybe, but NY MD VA PA are overall pretty sparsely populated.
Frank is a deeper fellow than all but a few really grasp.
His books were largely philosophical treatises and it's so often disappointing to talk with people who can't see past the superficial stories that he uses to explore an element of philosophy. I'm surprised that anyone can get through the entirety of Dune without that dawning on them, but it becomes much more clear when you start reading his other works (especially those not set in sci fi settings).
Because the population of people that own EVs is drastically smaller than the population of people that don't own EVs. Current EV owners represent the self-selected group of people for which owning an EV is a better choice (and can afford to purchase a new car). That the vast majority of people haven't walked away from ICE cars should be an indicator that they are not an appropriate choice for most people. (And I say this as a satisfied EV owner. It works for me, but not for everybody.)
Your statement makes just as much sense as saying that there are people in Venice who own a boat and walked away from cars, so boats obviously present much less hassle than cars. My neighbor who started a roofing company replaced his sedan with a pickup truck and hasn't looked back; pickup trucks must present far fewer hassles than sedans. Do you understand context?
You're already touching the microwave-emitting phone. How much more radiation are you going to get from sound waves?
I just wondered if there was any good way to protect the "login ticket" (the mail containing the one-time-use code) from interception in the 24 hours between when it is sent and the expiration time that we store.
For account creation, you can do this by requiring that the user authenticate with their username and password to use the "login ticket". If they know all of the authentication details and have control of the email account, there's really no way to distinguish them from a legitimate user (from your limited perspective). That said, acquiring all of the account details (including the password) and gaining access to the user's email account in a short time window represents an attack that's only likely for an account on a very important system and you (I) wouldn't deploy such a system with email as the only means of verification.
Things are more difficult for password reset requests because the user doesn't know their login details, but that's a different scenario from the account generation one. You have to make security compromises in the name of convenience if you want a user to be able to reset their password from a link in an email alone.
My site, on account creation, generates a password and sends it to you in email in cleartext before putting it in the DB. In that email is a link to reset the password; you can't log into the rest of the site until you've done so. The updated password (and the original) are stored encrypted in the DB.
If anyone has a better suggestion, I'm all ears.
Seriously? Let the user enter their own password at account creation and send them an email with a link (containing a random hash that's indexed to that user in the DB) to verify the email address (if that's even a necessary step... it isn't always).
Why would you need to generate a password for them, especially if you're going to email it plaintext and make them change it anyway? What possible benefit does that serve?
Well, here's a good place to start. RC4 has a number of vulnerabilities and while each of them can be mitigated to a certain extent (changing keys, discarding the beginning of streams, etc), the confidence is low that implemented systems will successfully avoid all of them and not open up new vulnerabilities in the process.
3DES isn't horridly broken. With the most commonly used keying option, it's vulnerable to a meet-in-the-middle attack, but it still provides 112 bit security. That'll start looking a little lean in the coming years, but it's still a beast to brute force.
On the other hand, RC4, SSLv3, and TLS1.0 are actually broken.
WTF have your shares got to do with your desire to deliberately trash the life savings of millions of taxi drivers in the western world?. They entered into a contract with the government...
Typically, taxi medallions aren't sold by the government anymore. They're typically sold by their previous holders and the high prices reflect their scarcity and perceived value. The market decides this value (even when they're auctioned off by the state), so there isn't any guarantee that they'll maintain that value. Any contracts that exist say nothing about limiting the supply or compensating medallion-holders for any speculative prices they paid. Buying a medallion for $800k is just as speculative as buying an $800k house or $800k worth of stock. There are no government guarantees that they will maintain value.
tl;dr... The economics of the taxi medallion situation are extremely similar to shares in a company. The "contracts" that you're referring to don't exist (at least in the form that you image).
The so called RDF Is a simply a trustworthy brand. A brand is a promise of quality, and even though they aren't perfect, they do deliver better quality than any other manufacturer. They deliver on their promise. They beat all other companies in customer satisfaction surveys year in year out.
In our contemporary world where any sort of "promise of quality" is seen as quaint and most companies see their established brand names as something to be cashed in for executive bonuses, people are trained to not give any weight at all to brands. See the AC response for a great example of that.
In fact, i would very much like to see relevant & useful ads. Right now, almost none of the ads i see are useful for me.
You would very much like to see relevant & useful ads, or you would very much like to stop seeing irrelevant & useless ads?
Because while the latter is true for me and most of the people that I know, the former is not quite so popular and doesn't necessarily follow from the latter. A much more palatable way to see fewer irrelevant & useless ads would be to stop seeing so many ads altogether. The more Google's hand touches things, the less likely that is to ever happen.
Perhaps a huge component of "politeness" is the ability to personally identify with the people around you in a significant way. Most of Northern Europe has a remarkable cultural homogeneity. Denmark, for example, is occupied by around 90% people of Danish descent, and even the 10% is a relatively recent phenomenon. Even the religion of Denmark is homogeneous, with the census reporting 80% belonging to Church of Denmark. The rest of Northern Europe is similarly homogeneous, even including the UK.
So often your countryfolk seem brusque at best and just plain rude a lot of the time.
The rudest people I've ever met in my life have all been European. I'm a very polite person, so I presume it's because they knew that I was American and were unable to stir up any empathy for somebody so culturally different and "other". Perhaps it isn't valid to take your trans-cultural interaction as an accurate representation of intra-cultural interactions.
"Average score" is a stupid metric for comparing ratings anyway. Here's a little discussion about several different utterly wrong ways to make sense of ratings, "average score" being #2.
Your "average score" would rate a product with a single 5 star rating higher than one with 45,000 ratings averaging out to 4.999. Their "proprietary algorithm" is likely to be more useful to everybody than a bunk rating system like "average score".
Anyway, if all of the ratings go up, then you just continue to compare them to each other like you did before. It's not like anyone bases purchases on the absolute star rating of any particular product.
And they most definitely DO NOT need continuous access. The 'software' you're speaking about is simply a set of scripts to handle the domain ownership verification and certificate issue. It doesn't need access to anything but your HTTPD configuration files and/or DNS.
That's not entirely true, at least in the long term. Domain ownership verification could be done entirely through the configuration files or through access to the served content. They claim to handle revocation and reissue of certificates through their site as well, which is going to require at least some sort of polling from your server.
Can you just request certificate signing from them, though?
It looks like they really want to run their software on your server. Software which, while open source, has access to much of your system and a continuous connection to their server.
What exactly do you think connects the intestine to the liver?