We're so close to this line already. Just think of all the information that your employer keeps track of, and legally so. All web site addresses, emails, and even phone conversations (since so many companies are already big enough to have a room where their own PBX is stationed).
Man, I just joined this place, and NO ONE knows anything about the PBX, which is just in an unlocked 'closet' that I can go into anytime. Why do telcos and employers think that "all those wires" make no sense to anyone? It's actually a piece of cake. Security through obscurity at it's worse!
Anyway, what would keep your employer from coughing up any of the information they already have on you? We've already had court cases where the Company's backup tapes are open for viewing! Add this to that Quova company that is port scanning everyone on the internet, and the information your employer has is their's to peruse. Some people asked how in the heck could Quova get your buying habits and interests from this... Maybe text parsign through all your emails. Or simply finding the Net-Nanny-Watch type software that already has all of your web site visits handy... and coded to your name.
Rader
Re:Do we want to hear about criminals like Steed?
on
Paul Steed Interview
·
· Score: 1
Well, ever since we were able to get those awesome games to work for Linux, we, like, worship him!
Well, you bring up obvious points. Yes, you can link to content... but the point of this thread was that we could run our own web sites about topics that we wanted.
If the purpose of this 'underground' web site was to run information/news that the main medias were afraid to cover, (or for political or advertisement reasons) then what are you going to link to?
Plus, another point of this thread was whether or not you could run this personal web site in competition with a Major. If you link or call other news-clips your own, you're going to get shut down quickly.
You mentioned Moore's Law being on your side, but they're also Gates law, which is very similar... applications will bloat up to the capacity that Moore's Law provide. Plus, I don't know how many 18-months you want to wait to afford running SlashDot at home. My argument still stands. You can't afford to run a similar sized operation like Slashdot at home. Today. Tomorrow. Not only that, but to compete again the imaginary Major Media that we had come up with, we're talking even more bandwidth to run flashy content to compete.
I do however cringe at your unfortunately good point that one thing to fear is TW giving AOL packets a higher priority on the internet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True, but even a cheap or freely run 'underground' web site won't get any eyes reading it, if the Main media gets its ways.
For instance, AOL puts the time and money into making sure everyone goes there for its news. They could do this in many ways. Prizes, points for free gifts, high-bandwidth news clips.
In fact, that is one point that makes your argument slightly fall apart. Simply that it does cost money to run high bandwidth. Can you afford to run 1,000 simultaneous downloads/streaming of a 7MB news MPG?
You and I, for instance could not even aford to run Slashdot from our homes. Sure we could run something more watered down, but would it be interesting enough?
I've tried to say these things before in responses to Katz' rough drafts, and I have to say this was the most intelligent, civil, and correct response ever to the whole Katz rought draft posting problem.
Thank you!
There is an over-zealousness about all of Katz' rough drafts. You read his text, and re-read it when he repeats it, and re-read it when he repeats it again. And the whole time, you just don't buy that the sun is blue, even though he's telling you how blue it is. It's like he wants to be the apostle of Open Source media (whatever that is) so badly, that he's making up these 'truths'. I have never seen someone try SO hard to make new words. Webster's dictionary doesn't give credit! (But I'm sure that the next bad book he writes he'll be sure to give himself credit)
(I still can't believe I bought and read GEEKS, by Katz. I just wish it was about the geeks more, and less about Katz)
I do think that Katz has a place. His articles do cover technology a bit, and I'd love to see more "professional" writers tackle the genre and open the eyes of the rest of the world (non-geeks) But his articles here, at slashdot, just don't fit in. Not only is he preaching to the choir, but the lack of details, nitty gritty, sources, etc just don't hold my interest. He's trying to open eyes, but either our eyes are already open, or it's just too shallow. I'd like him to open my eyes about internal details of how Intel's marketing hype is possibly succeeding in the flawed RDRambus! And hell, he could even talk about the social aspects of how companies with lots of money get away with this shit. But I guess that wouldn't help his own self interests.
I don't want to filter anything on slashdot. I could miss something important. Plus, I want to know what most people get out of Slashdot.
I would rather have the filtering start at the top, and not have Katz' first rough drafts show up here in the first place.
People get mad when posters with a +2 default post garbage, just like people get mad that no matter how bad Katz' articles may be, he automatically gets to post his rough drafts here.
Everything is going good this week, we get to hear a little about this, a new news item about that, and boom, we get more one-sided crap with no research involved at all. It just doesn't fit. Maybe we could have the left hand side of the web page list all of Katz' new rough drafts. I have no problem with that. If Slashdot owners want him writing about... 'stuff', they can, just put him in his own article section. I'd just rather see news items in the main section.
Looks like all you have to do to get an article accepted by slashdot is to Promote Open Source Media. Whatever that really means.
I like Slashdot a lot (except of course the long pointless Katz articles) but this site is only posting technological articles (which is fine by me, and if they stray - they get yelled at by the readers) If I want up to the minute information about, oh I don't know... news, then I have to watch TV or similar outlet, watch a news reporter do their job like sticking a camera between 2 policemen that are trying to push 'em back. Something you won't get from a web site. Or if you do, it's the same clip, but a week later.
And I certainly won't get any local news from a web site. Hey, anyone here care that the White River in Indiana (near me) had every fish die in it, and they still can't find out why? Well, you probably don't, just like I could care less about your local news story from last night about how a lady in your local town got her ass bit by a baby alligator that crawled up through the toilet pipes.
From what I can see, web sites sporting news are great for reading user comments (many can cut through the bullshit with their expertise) and articles about reflection, or about research, after effects, etc. Post-news information almost.
Maybe Open Media (whatever that means) is getting there. If so, I'd rather hear about how we're getting there, how or if it's possible. I don't want to read Katz sugar coat and force us to believe we're there already, and that he's one of the apostles leading the charge.
No wonder Open Media are the premier medium of the young, and are also gaining audience, market share and revenue.
Off course it's gaining market share. It's always easy to go up from 0%.
The web is still a mess out there. I was able to find slashdot, tomshardware, anandtech, and a few others, but they're computer/techy related, and much more popular "Open Media" web sites (whatever that means). I wouldn't know where to turn to find the ultimate, all in one "Open Media" (whatever that means) source for vampires, or fishing. Oh wait, it's called Newsgroups.
It's just information sharing. It's hardly news. And each time they post a Katz article on Slashdot, Slashdot becomes less of a quality news source.
What is news? Something new, something I didn't know before. Something happening farther away than my field of vision (500 feet, or if in a Dilbert cubicle, 5 feet). Opinions, suggestions, ramblings, etc, has it's place, and I love them dearly, but it's hardly news. Slashdot is an invaluable tool for me because the TV News doesn't cover these topics! (if they do, it's never with the depth I would want) But sites that cover the main news still can't compete against TV, etc. At least not yet.
Especially Apple. I can't imagine if Apple was the leader in O/S and hardware right now. You just know that Jobs would force us to worship him, and he'd hire Ron Hubbard's ghost to make up a religion called Appleology.
Breakdown for WinNT: Sybase : 39% Cenutura : 10% Oracle : 9% Microsoft : 8% Others : 19% (err, i know NT isn't a big or only platform, but there are charts for others)
Another story shows different NT marketshare: Oracle: 41% Microsoft: 38.8%
Well, I guess as the saying goes, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".
However, each site I perused said that Microsoft is carving away at Oracles' shares, and will continue to do so. And also entered the market with a much higher market share than predicted. And even more important, that most of its sales are cheaper solutions and costing traditional, higher prices solutions a lot of money.
Me too! University of Iowa, was about $90 a semester in mandatory computer fees. Something that wasn't covered by any loans, tuition scholarships, etc.
Napster is not publicly traded and does not have stockholders to answer to. If they did, this saga would have ended a long, long time before they had multiple, concurrent lawsuits piling up.
It doesn't have PUBLIC stockholders. But private companies are able to give stocks away for incentive reasons. In fact, that's the number one reason for companies to go IPO. Not because the owners want to get rich from their shares being worth more, but the #3, #4 - #10 employees want to see their carrot turn into serious cash. Besides what to the venture capitalists get out of pouring money into it?
Sure they're not public, blah blah blah, but that is their main goal. So they are working towards the same goals as someone who already is publically traded. There's nothing wrong with his post, except maybe that someone beat you to it.
You are correct in everything you said. I just would like to add that Napster was ESPECIALLY in it for the money. I've read articles last year that mentioned they were VERY much into it for the money.
Ok, so I repeated myself. But you know, there's this spectrum, and on one side you have Ross Perot,.. I mean one one side you've got ALL MONEY and on the other side you got FOR THE IDEA... and I was just in awe how much they were leaning towards that left hand side. But hey. If Taco Bell feels good about selling Grade E meat...It's all about the Benjamins.
Well maybe if you're searching for some local artist that hasn't made any CD's, or if you just like German Polka, or you are just one of those people that think they're cool because they like some obscure punk music (who get mad when someone else likes them too, and then quit listening to them).
I've found some weird and obscure shit on Napster. I've tried to fill scratched songs from my Cd's before, and sometimes I'd have to try a few days in a row, but did end up finding it.
You're obviously just not a user of Napster. Really. It's numbers! CDDB.com lists about 500,000 albums with 400 new ones a day. EVERYONE in the world with EVERY album in the world just isn't on Napster. Let alone the same holy hour that you got on that one time. What's wrong, couldn't you find that Hanson Bootleg song that they played at your birthday? Why am I even arguing with someone that mentions 18-25 group as a stereotype. Besides 14-21 is a much more accurate range. Let alone argue with Signal 11. Sigh, I knew I shouldn't have gone in to work today.
Oh, and one last thing, most of the music is held by individual users, not mp3 servers, not universities, and not napster (as you seemed to mention). The average user has 100 - 150 songs. And they make up the bulk of all Napster listings. No shit! Another power-in-numbers thing.
Well, it hasn't hit yet. Pricewatch still sells 64MB of SDRAM for $49. Pretty damn good prices. Usually you see the prices drop before you read an article like this. I don't remember what the prices were like back in February (too much up and down). I don't think comparing today's $8.50 to February's $4.50 is a good example, considering that February was close to an all time low.
I still can't believe this article came out before the prices dropped, so if you do believe the article, go buy your Dimms up today. Or wait through the storm, like I had to late last year ($2.50 + per MB?? ouch)
Oh no?! Does this mean that's Intel dream of RDRAM being the Next Big Thing(tm) will be even MORE expensive? Ha! Bastard hype.
Now LCD displays, that should be interesting. I wonder if these new, sharp TFT displays are eating up resources?
I can't believe it! Did you guys read wha the ZDNet article had?
This month, MP3.com Inc., a San Diego Internet site, reached an out-of-court settlement with two big record labels over a separate copyright suit. MP3.com agreed to pay 1.5 cents each time a user stores a song using MP3.com's service, as well as a third of a cent each time the song is listened to from the company's Web site.
Unbelievable. I've been watching the mp3.com debate for a year now. Not only did they have to pay 100 million to do this, but now they have to pay money for each stream! (And this is just for the 2 out of 5 recording companies.)
Did anyone try out Gnute.com? What a great idea! (it bombed out on my first download try, but it's probably being/.'d, or simply the person I downloaded from went offline.) Gnute.com simply hooks up a dynamic web page allowing you to practically run their gnutella software. You simply get their searches, their stats, etc pasted up to your web page. Nice.
This is great, because no matter how good Gnutella is, it just ain't going to get all the 12 year old retards on Napster to try it out, unless it gets the point & click ease of a web site. Not only that, but now even AOL users can use something this simple! Now that's a lot of sheep without a shepard!
There is one problem though! If everyone used Gnute.com instead, then there would be no files to download!
I'm curious if the download part of Gnute.com is still peer2peer/dchp, or if it's from downloadee to gnute.com to me. I'm sure it's not the latter, since that would kill gnute.com's bandwidth.
I was a little disappointed about the Tabloid's site called: stopnapster.com. I had hoped it was a joke, but they brought up too many good points for it to be a joke. I certainly hope that none of their ideas catch on (Like mp3 bombs, trojans, etc) Hopefully people would listen to what they download, and then delete it if it had anti-piracy speakers talking in it!
...it's just that Katz guy that gets my blood boiling with his bad journalism.:-)
You know... I think that whole day was kind of weird. I don't think anyone behaved or acted normally after Katz's last "article". No one should be held accountable for their actions that day!!
I can see it now... Instead of pleading insanity for the rampage, I can plead "Katz".
You comments were a breath of fresh air, so no apologies, mmKay.
OC-768? Cool. I wonder if they'll do what Excite @Home is doing and start charging different rates for "preferred" service?
Can anyone explain to everyone here how the T1 & T3 and OC3 rates work? I know that OC3 vs. T3 is a difference in Digital only for OC...
We work at a small software company and just got a fraction T1 line in. So we did the math, knowing what a T1 can push. But we realized that a T3 wasn't only 3 times faster than a T1? It was much more. What is the difference? And while we're at it, maybe someone can explain what an OC3 gets vs. Napster's OC-48, and now with the OC-768?
I'd really appreciate it, and would love to know once and for all the correct answer so that we quit guessing around here. Thanks!
Ok, I read the introduction & summary of your web site that you posted. (By the way I was only replying to one of your posts, I did not see the other.)
Here is the quote you probably are refering to: --The digital tide is having less of a direct negative impact on cable TV news, radio and print outlets. The Pew Research Center survey finds no evidence that Internet use is driving down regular use of cable news channels, daily newspapers, or radio news. However, all news outlets are being affected by the public's slowly declining appetite for the news. --
The first thing that came to my mind was where is their data? Oh well, I'll tell you where mine is... simple first-hand experience. My family has owned their own newspaper for 26 years, I've helped start a newspaper, and my girlfriend of 6 years has worked for a large daily newspaper. And I could draw a chart, but all I can say is that newsprint is hurting in all directions. However, since I'm on the inside, maybe what I see as a problem isn't apparent to the people that just get the newspaper. After all, you can't see that some of the advertisement in the newspaper was given away for free just to intice or keep advertisers, or maybe remember that there used to be this one guy on page 3 every week for the last 10 years, but now he went to cable advertisement, etc. Or see that postage rates are twice as much as they were 6 years ago, or that paper prices fluctuate as wildly as gas prices.
It's possible that subscriptions are staying the same. However the things that make a company "successful" such as making enough money, are being hurt. I highlighted the word "DIRECT" up in the quote above. Even the place you quoted know that Indirectly the internet affects almost everything.
So I'll say it again, maybe people still turn to the newspaper to read news, but the advertisers still aren't. (However, it's not just the internet that is causing this problem. Radio and TV have directly affected my past advertisers. Sometimes just because they want to "try" it out.) Advertisement is important, because subscription fees barely pay printing and mailing (if at all). I know of a specialty newspaper that does no advertising and all fees are payed by subscription cost: $250 a year for only 12 issues. The paper is no more than 40 pages, also. I give this example just incase someone wanted to argue that subscription monies help pay the bills. They don't, unless it's expensive like I mentioned.
TV & Radio have increased competition. And now the internet is too. Here is one indirect example of how the internet is affecting newspapers: People's time. I don't care if people AREN'T reading their news on the internet, they're spending a percentage of their waking days to it. And that cuts into newspapers too. One of the newspapers I listed up above as first hand is a world-wide hobby newspaper.(To simplify, I'll just say it was about antiques). Not only is EBAY hurting this old-style marketplace, but people are just farting around on the internet now and now "playing" with their other hobbies. And on a last last note, even daily newspapers (that you are familiar with) do more than just show the news. They are a place to get your Movie listings, to get your classifieds, to get your sale prices, etc. And the internet does it too, and even better sometimes. FREE classifieds, free movie listings (with descriptions, reviews, etc), places to buy wholesale instead of retail.
Sorry, that all the proof I have. I was just reacting to the comment that the internet doesn't affect newspapers.
First, it's not MSCE, it's MCSE (microsoft certified system engineer) and secondly, VB is programming, not network administration, so it's MCSD (miscrosoft certified solution developer).
I enjoy Microsoft bashing better with those who have at least half a clue...
Slashdot Mirror
Rader
Man, I just joined this place, and NO ONE knows anything about the PBX, which is just in an unlocked 'closet' that I can go into anytime. Why do telcos and employers think that "all those wires" make no sense to anyone? It's actually a piece of cake. Security through obscurity at it's worse!
Anyway, what would keep your employer from coughing up any of the information they already have on you? We've already had court cases where the Company's backup tapes are open for viewing! Add this to that Quova company that is port scanning everyone on the internet, and the information your employer has is their's to peruse. Some people asked how in the heck could Quova get your buying habits and interests from this... Maybe text parsign through all your emails. Or simply finding the Net-Nanny-Watch type software that already has all of your web site visits handy... and coded to your name.
Rader
Rader
Rader
If the purpose of this 'underground' web site was to run information/news that the main medias were afraid to cover, (or for political or advertisement reasons) then what are you going to link to?
Plus, another point of this thread was whether or not you could run this personal web site in competition with a Major. If you link or call other news-clips your own, you're going to get shut down quickly.
You mentioned Moore's Law being on your side, but they're also Gates law, which is very similar... applications will bloat up to the capacity that Moore's Law provide. Plus, I don't know how many 18-months you want to wait to afford running SlashDot at home. My argument still stands. You can't afford to run a similar sized operation like Slashdot at home. Today. Tomorrow. Not only that, but to compete again the imaginary Major Media that we had come up with, we're talking even more bandwidth to run flashy content to compete.
I do however cringe at your unfortunately good point that one thing to fear is TW giving AOL packets a higher priority on the internet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rader
Grass roots? Hardly seems like an all out attempt.
Rader
For instance, AOL puts the time and money into making sure everyone goes there for its news. They could do this in many ways. Prizes, points for free gifts, high-bandwidth news clips.
In fact, that is one point that makes your argument slightly fall apart. Simply that it does cost money to run high bandwidth. Can you afford to run 1,000 simultaneous downloads/streaming of a 7MB news MPG?
You and I, for instance could not even aford to run Slashdot from our homes. Sure we could run something more watered down, but would it be interesting enough?
Rader
Thank you!
There is an over-zealousness about all of Katz' rough drafts. You read his text, and re-read it when he repeats it, and re-read it when he repeats it again. And the whole time, you just don't buy that the sun is blue, even though he's telling you how blue it is. It's like he wants to be the apostle of Open Source media (whatever that is) so badly, that he's making up these 'truths'. I have never seen someone try SO hard to make new words. Webster's dictionary doesn't give credit! (But I'm sure that the next bad book he writes he'll be sure to give himself credit)
(I still can't believe I bought and read GEEKS, by Katz. I just wish it was about the geeks more, and less about Katz)
I do think that Katz has a place. His articles do cover technology a bit, and I'd love to see more "professional" writers tackle the genre and open the eyes of the rest of the world (non-geeks) But his articles here, at slashdot, just don't fit in. Not only is he preaching to the choir, but the lack of details, nitty gritty, sources, etc just don't hold my interest. He's trying to open eyes, but either our eyes are already open, or it's just too shallow.
I'd like him to open my eyes about internal details of how Intel's marketing hype is possibly succeeding in the flawed RDRambus! And hell, he could even talk about the social aspects of how companies with lots of money get away with this shit.
But I guess that wouldn't help his own self interests.
Rader
I would rather have the filtering start at the top, and not have Katz' first rough drafts show up here in the first place.
People get mad when posters with a +2 default post garbage, just like people get mad that no matter how bad Katz' articles may be, he automatically gets to post his rough drafts here.
Everything is going good this week, we get to hear a little about this, a new news item about that, and boom, we get more one-sided crap with no research involved at all. It just doesn't fit. Maybe we could have the left hand side of the web page list all of Katz' new rough drafts. I have no problem with that. If Slashdot owners want him writing about... 'stuff', they can, just put him in his own article section. I'd just rather see news items in the main section.
Rader
I like Slashdot a lot (except of course the long pointless Katz articles) but this site is only posting technological articles (which is fine by me, and if they stray - they get yelled at by the readers) If I want up to the minute information about, oh I don't know... news, then I have to watch TV or similar outlet, watch a news reporter do their job like sticking a camera between 2 policemen that are trying to push 'em back. Something you won't get from a web site. Or if you do, it's the same clip, but a week later.
And I certainly won't get any local news from a web site. Hey, anyone here care that the White River in Indiana (near me) had every fish die in it, and they still can't find out why? Well, you probably don't, just like I could care less about your local news story from last night about how a lady in your local town got her ass bit by a baby alligator that crawled up through the toilet pipes.
From what I can see, web sites sporting news are great for reading user comments (many can cut through the bullshit with their expertise) and articles about reflection, or about research, after effects, etc. Post-news information almost.
Maybe Open Media (whatever that means) is getting there. If so, I'd rather hear about how we're getting there, how or if it's possible. I don't want to read Katz sugar coat and force us to believe we're there already, and that he's one of the apostles leading the charge.
No wonder Open Media are the premier medium of the young, and are also gaining audience, market share and revenue.
Off course it's gaining market share. It's always easy to go up from 0%.
The web is still a mess out there. I was able to find slashdot, tomshardware, anandtech, and a few others, but they're computer/techy related, and much more popular "Open Media" web sites (whatever that means). I wouldn't know where to turn to find the ultimate, all in one "Open Media" (whatever that means) source for vampires, or fishing. Oh wait, it's called Newsgroups.
It's just information sharing. It's hardly news. And each time they post a Katz article on Slashdot, Slashdot becomes less of a quality news source.
What is news? Something new, something I didn't know before. Something happening farther away than my field of vision (500 feet, or if in a Dilbert cubicle, 5 feet). Opinions, suggestions, ramblings, etc, has it's place, and I love them dearly, but it's hardly news. Slashdot is an invaluable tool for me because the TV News doesn't cover these topics! (if they do, it's never with the depth I would want) But sites that cover the main news still can't compete against TV, etc. At least not yet.
Rader
Especially Apple. I can't imagine if Apple was the leader in O/S and hardware right now. You just know that Jobs would force us to worship him, and he'd hire Ron Hubbard's ghost to make up a religion called Appleology.
Rader
Uh, the only reason he has more money (right now) is because Gates just gave away a bunch of billions.
It breaks down for 1999 as:
Hyperion : 28%
Oracle : 11.4 %
Cognos : 11.1 %
Microsoft : 7.9
Applix : 3.1
IBM : 3.0
Informix : 0.9
Here is my SQL-Base Market Share source.
Breakdown for WinNT:
Sybase : 39%
Cenutura : 10%
Oracle : 9%
Microsoft : 8%
Others : 19%
(err, i know NT isn't a big or only platform, but there are charts for others)
Another story shows different NT marketshare:
Oracle: 41%
Microsoft: 38.8%
And another freaking story says Oracle is at 53%.
Well, I guess as the saying goes, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics".
However, each site I perused said that Microsoft is carving away at Oracles' shares, and will continue to do so. And also entered the market with a much higher market share than predicted. And even more important, that most of its sales are cheaper solutions and costing traditional, higher prices solutions a lot of money.
Rader
Totally killed my zero-income lifestyle.
Rader
It doesn't have PUBLIC stockholders. But private companies are able to give stocks away for incentive reasons. In fact, that's the number one reason for companies to go IPO. Not because the owners want to get rich from their shares being worth more, but the #3, #4 - #10 employees want to see their carrot turn into serious cash. Besides what to the venture capitalists get out of pouring money into it?
Sure they're not public, blah blah blah, but that is their main goal. So they are working towards the same goals as someone who already is publically traded. There's nothing wrong with his post, except maybe that someone beat you to it.
Rader
Ok, so I repeated myself. But you know, there's this spectrum, and on one side you have Ross Perot,.. I mean one one side you've got ALL MONEY and on the other side you got FOR THE IDEA... and I was just in awe how much they were leaning towards that left hand side. But hey. If Taco Bell feels good about selling Grade E meat...It's all about the Benjamins.
Rader
I've found some weird and obscure shit on Napster. I've tried to fill scratched songs from my Cd's before, and sometimes I'd have to try a few days in a row, but did end up finding it.
You're obviously just not a user of Napster. Really. It's numbers! CDDB.com lists about 500,000 albums with 400 new ones a day. EVERYONE in the world with EVERY album in the world just isn't on Napster. Let alone the same holy hour that you got on that one time. What's wrong, couldn't you find that Hanson Bootleg song that they played at your birthday? Why am I even arguing with someone that mentions 18-25 group as a stereotype. Besides 14-21 is a much more accurate range. Let alone argue with Signal 11. Sigh, I knew I shouldn't have gone in to work today.
Oh, and one last thing, most of the music is held by individual users, not mp3 servers, not universities, and not napster (as you seemed to mention). The average user has 100 - 150 songs. And they make up the bulk of all Napster listings. No shit! Another power-in-numbers thing.
Rader
Pricewatch still sells 64MB of SDRAM for $49. Pretty damn good prices. Usually you see the prices drop before you read an article like this. I don't remember what the prices were like back in February (too much up and down). I don't think comparing today's $8.50 to February's $4.50 is a good example, considering that February was close to an all time low.
I still can't believe this article came out before the prices dropped, so if you do believe the article, go buy your Dimms up today. Or wait through the storm, like I had to late last year ($2.50 + per MB?? ouch)
Oh no?! Does this mean that's Intel dream of RDRAM being the Next Big Thing(tm) will be even MORE expensive? Ha! Bastard hype.
Now LCD displays, that should be interesting. I wonder if these new, sharp TFT displays are eating up resources?
Rader
This month, MP3.com Inc., a San Diego Internet site, reached an out-of-court settlement with two big record labels over a separate copyright suit. MP3.com agreed to pay 1.5 cents each time a user stores a song using MP3.com's service, as well as a third of a cent each time the song is listened to from the company's Web site.
Unbelievable. I've been watching the mp3.com debate for a year now. Not only did they have to pay 100 million to do this, but now they have to pay money for each stream! (And this is just for the 2 out of 5 recording companies.)
Did anyone try out Gnute.com? What a great idea! (it bombed out on my first download try, but it's probably being /.'d, or simply the person I downloaded from went offline.) Gnute.com simply hooks up a dynamic web page allowing you to practically run their gnutella software. You simply get their searches, their stats, etc pasted up to your web page. Nice.
This is great, because no matter how good Gnutella is, it just ain't going to get all the 12 year old retards on Napster to try it out, unless it gets the point & click ease of a web site. Not only that, but now even AOL users can use something this simple! Now that's a lot of sheep without a shepard!
There is one problem though! If everyone used Gnute.com instead, then there would be no files to download!
I'm curious if the download part of Gnute.com is still peer2peer/dchp, or if it's from downloadee to gnute.com to me. I'm sure it's not the latter, since that would kill gnute.com's bandwidth.
I was a little disappointed about the Tabloid's site called: stopnapster.com. I had hoped it was a joke, but they brought up too many good points for it to be a joke. I certainly hope that none of their ideas catch on (Like mp3 bombs, trojans, etc) Hopefully people would listen to what they download, and then delete it if it had anti-piracy speakers talking in it!
You know... I think that whole day was kind of weird. I don't think anyone behaved or acted normally after Katz's last "article". No one should be held accountable for their actions that day!!
I can see it now... Instead of pleading insanity for the rampage, I can plead "Katz".
You comments were a breath of fresh air, so no apologies, mmKay.
Rader
Can anyone explain to everyone here how the T1 & T3 and OC3 rates work? I know that OC3 vs. T3 is a difference in Digital only for OC...
We work at a small software company and just got a fraction T1 line in. So we did the math, knowing what a T1 can push. But we realized that a T3 wasn't only 3 times faster than a T1? It was much more. What is the difference? And while we're at it, maybe someone can explain what an OC3 gets vs. Napster's OC-48, and now with the OC-768?
I'd really appreciate it, and would love to know once and for all the correct answer so that we quit guessing around here. Thanks!
Rader
Here is the quote you probably are refering to:
--The digital tide is having less of a direct negative impact on cable TV news, radio and print outlets. The Pew Research Center survey finds no evidence that Internet use is driving down regular use of cable news channels, daily newspapers, or radio news. However, all news outlets are being affected by the public's slowly declining appetite for the news. --
The first thing that came to my mind was where is their data? Oh well, I'll tell you where mine is... simple first-hand experience. My family has owned their own newspaper for 26 years, I've helped start a newspaper, and my girlfriend of 6 years has worked for a large daily newspaper. And I could draw a chart, but all I can say is that newsprint is hurting in all directions. However, since I'm on the inside, maybe what I see as a problem isn't apparent to the people that just get the newspaper. After all, you can't see that some of the advertisement in the newspaper was given away for free just to intice or keep advertisers, or maybe remember that there used to be this one guy on page 3 every week for the last 10 years, but now he went to cable advertisement, etc. Or see that postage rates are twice as much as they were 6 years ago, or that paper prices fluctuate as wildly as gas prices.
It's possible that subscriptions are staying the same. However the things that make a company "successful" such as making enough money, are being hurt. I highlighted the word "DIRECT" up in the quote above. Even the place you quoted know that Indirectly the internet affects almost everything.
So I'll say it again, maybe people still turn to the newspaper to read news, but the advertisers still aren't. (However, it's not just the internet that is causing this problem. Radio and TV have directly affected my past advertisers. Sometimes just because they want to "try" it out.) Advertisement is important, because subscription fees barely pay printing and mailing (if at all). I know of a specialty newspaper that does no advertising and all fees are payed by subscription cost: $250 a year for only 12 issues. The paper is no more than 40 pages, also. I give this example just incase someone wanted to argue that subscription monies help pay the bills. They don't, unless it's expensive like I mentioned.
TV & Radio have increased competition. And now the internet is too. Here is one indirect example of how the internet is affecting newspapers: People's time. I don't care if people AREN'T reading their news on the internet, they're spending a percentage of their waking days to it. And that cuts into newspapers too. One of the newspapers I listed up above as first hand is a world-wide hobby newspaper.(To simplify, I'll just say it was about antiques). Not only is EBAY hurting this old-style marketplace, but people are just farting around on the internet now and now "playing" with their other hobbies. And on a last last note, even daily newspapers (that you are familiar with) do more than just show the news. They are a place to get your Movie listings, to get your classifieds, to get your sale prices, etc. And the internet does it too, and even better sometimes. FREE classifieds, free movie listings (with descriptions, reviews, etc), places to buy wholesale instead of retail.
Sorry, that all the proof I have. I was just reacting to the comment that the internet doesn't affect newspapers.
Dustin
I enjoy Microsoft bashing better with those who have at least half a clue...
Rader