If I were to go back and reference say, the Altiar 8800, or some such, then I could see where one might consider a text program something of a luxary: The entirity of output to begin with were flashing LEDs. Likewise primitive, input was accomplished via switches. However, that is going a long ways back.
To do any sort of "computer thing" right now, one needs, at the very least, some sort of capacity to manipulate a plain old ascii text file. And this is where I think my disconnect comes in. I just don't see how one can call it a "non-computer thing" these days. The state of the Art of computing has come quite far in the 30 some years since the microcomputer was introduced. New things are being done all of the time. The difference I think, is what Burke pointed out in his "The Day the Universe Changed" series: That very little of this stuff is being done where the public can examine and participate.
What, exactly, do you mean by "non-computer things"? I'm having a bit of trouble de-coding that one becuase, well, it's very non-sensical. How can a computer do things that it is not capable of doing? Are you going back to the definition of "That which computes and tabulates"?
If that is the case, I for one, would like to have an example cited. I cannot see anything, from web-browing to game playing, in which a computer does not do computation.
I doubt EGM did anything more useful than taking out their old GameBoy and handed it to some editor's kid. This is going to be somebody who is throughly spoiled when it comes to the games they get to play. The latest releases on the latest hardware. Given that, no wonder the kids "mocked the tittles mercliessly". Not to mention if they put that on the cover how many more copies are going to be bought up by older gamers who may not have even like the rag to begin with.
"News 20 years from now: "This just in... McDonalds tastier than ever! More at 11." I only can hope something changes to destroy this trend by then.
The only thing which would ever change this trend is to get the people who own the newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters to quit with the funny idea that news is there to be manipulated into profits for themselves as well as others.
Weird Al's commentary for UHF is by far, the best I've ever heard. A lot of the little extra bits of information, like how the "Spatula City" sign was up for months after they shot the scene and had people pulling off the highway to try to find it. It was as entertaining as it was informative.
I don't know how bizzaro it is to you, but considering that most of the technology is already in place at the point of manufacture (ie, machines which count the number of pills at very high speeds, double check that against the known, discrete weight of each pill, and the weight of a filled bottle, other machines to move and sort the bottles according to what is being manufactured and so forth), the only dangerous varible I can think of is the placement of each bottle in the cabinents at the individual pharmacies -- which also can be controlled to a certain extent when the system is purchaced and in place -- I see no reason why a fully automated pharmacy couldn't exist.
I think the only thing keeping such from existing is people's lack of trust in those who craete such systems.
"Seriously, why the hell does your medical information need to be transmitted by radio to a fscking cash register? We can't train people to fscking READ anymore?"
Well, think of it from a more profit-centric vein.
Once they get all of that in place, then it would be trivial to have what you need as your medication also on an RFID, which would be hooked up to a despensing machine of some sort, and *poof*! No humans needed in the process at all. Suddenly all of those millions of dollars being wasted on employing highly trained, well educated, people who do nothing but stand around all day to fill bottles (and destroy our profits), gone!
I don't know if this is discussed in the later posts or not, but in this day and age, why would anybody choose to counterfeit?
Given that we have one time use credit cards, a banking system which has a lot of wire transfer traffic on it, and a thousand other things that give us virtual* money...why trouble yourself with creating the real-world equilivant? As pointed out in numerous other posts, there are several things which you can do wrong which can catch you. Not to mention what this and other articles itself talks about and imply.
The trouble to learn the bank's electronic transfer systems as well as gaining access cannot be any harder than getting the proper equipment to pull off a good, large scale counterfeiting scheme. Let's not even go into how all most all banks still are very, very quiet when someone does do an electronic break in. It took the feds, what? Three years to get that bank in NY to fess up that the Russian mob had used fake electronic transfers to help launder billions of dollars?
*[With a fait money system, such as the one used in the US, the money is never back with a material component such as gold, silver, or diamonds. In essense, all such money not backed in that way is virtual since you can't look at a physical object and say that the value of the money and the value of the object are the same.]
Are you sure about that? I for one do not believe for one second that our caveman ancestors would have gone anywhere near a glow-n-the-dark wolly mammoth.
That, at least to my mind, brings up a very important concept which is lacking in American politics.
It seems that in this forum (that forum being/. that is) there are a good many people who have a distinct dislike of much of the politics of the political. That in fact, wish they could choose such an option for their ballots so that their distaste for the choices presented in the elections could be recorded in some fashion. So does not the prospect of a vote, compiled, completed, and well, calculated by machines - which by their own designs are inherintly limited in capacity to understand the difference between a good, correct vote, an incomplete but not necessarily incorrect vote, and a purposefully spoiled vote (but a vote all the same) - doesn't that bother anybody?
Seriously, doesn't the push to these computerized voting procedures seem just a little too...pat in its conclusion?
I can just hear the politicans in a few years pushing these machines: "They're great! They'll always count the votes just right and we'll be able to get nearly instant results! You of the pulic will know instantly just who is going to fulfill your roll of leadership!"
What is going to happen with things like the spoiled ballots or being able to at least have a write-in canidate (in those last few areas which allow for such things)?
GameCube games sell for $50, and cost significantly less to produce. Wouldn't you much rather sell GameCube games than GameBoy Advance games?
Ah! But the crux of that argument relies upon the user's perception of value. So far, portable game play != console level of game play. They would start out having to work up against that mentality which means having to have the lower prices that the GBA/SP games bring in right now.
The GC is already set to be portable. It has a frickin' handle on the back of it for you to hold! It has a smaller form factor than any thing since the PS1. And there are thrid party mini-screens for it just like the PS1.
Let's not even get into why Nintendo would want to cut into the well established, well running market of the Gameboy.
I don't disagree with you. But had the parents actually spent five minutes in there either observering their kids or talking to the people who were running, they'd find out that there wasn't a whole lot tolerated.
From what I heard, most of the complaints followed whatever was on the news that week. Teen drug use, alcohol, gangs, and even once, a claim that some girl got pregnant in there. Almost all of them were foundless. I don't think it helped matters any to realize that the arcade was three stores down from the Christian bookstore as well.
There was a great, and I do mean great, arcade in my local mall when I was growing up. It had darkish lighting, ashtrays everywhere, a coke despenser and the overall perfect atmosphere for somebody wanting to get away from everything to play a game or two.
Parents always complained about the place, as parents are want to do. Not that anything ever went down there. The owners were parents themsevles and wanted to make sure it was just a fun place to hang out.
Long story short the mall they were located in got tired of hearing parental complaints so they forced them out by jacking up the stall price quarter after quarter after quarter until it got too pricy. About a year after it left, the mall sold the stall and the one next to it to a Fun Factory.
Now, the place is all lit up, bright and shiny, and costs three to four times as much for each game. There a couple of guys who stand behind the counter and occasionally play a game or two, but it is now home to a few mall rat gangs and has had more fights break out in the last couple of years over high scores than the old place ever did in its lifetime.
The attitude towards DRM by certain parties is more than a little frightenting. Why aim for 100% you ask? Becuase this is shaping up to be another "War on X".
Just like the War on Drugs or the War on Terror, this is not there to help the acutal citizens of our country. This is designed to help transfer a great deal of money and freedoms away from individuals who might or might not be guilty of abusing a substance (in this case movies, music, and other forms of entertainment) to another group who already enjoys a good deal of both.
Think about it. What better way to garentee a lifetime of profits than setting up a proven model of business? Setup laws which have no chance of being enforced in a reasonable way, help create an even larger military-like police force, and then create a support and consultation industry for that new police force.
With this move, it seems that the existing cable industry *wants* to be labeled a telecommunication service. Quick! Somebody go tell the Ninth Circuit Court that it was right before it's too late!
That nice little piece of paranoia sounds good and all, but I have to question the basis of it all.
Just how much does Hollywood really loose to the Indies and home copies?
No. Really. It can't be that much to begin with. Everybody I've known who wanted to make their own films, were film snobs to begin with. They saw two, maybe three movies at the mulitplex a year. Most of their film viewings went at the art house which doesn't pay the *AA a cent anyways.
Hollywood almost cut off their left foot by trying to get the VCR outlawed, and were ultimately shown that despite people dubbing off the occasional copy for friends and relatives was a very profitable thing. These are not stupid people (just incredibly greedy). They've already been shown that giving the public the ability to create the occasional copy helps them out in the long term.
I agree. However, in taking this route do you not risk ruining the at-home market? In marketing the movies in such a way as to convince people that the only "way" to see the film is in the theater you run the risk of turning people off of getting the same movie for themselves. "It won't be as good in the living room." or "My television just doesn't do justice the way a 50-foot screen can" are things one would have to use in such marketing campaigns. In such a situation how do you keep people buying the DVD? I don't think you can, hence the schism and hypocrisy in such actions which the artical goes on about.
They want us to watch these films.
They want us to hear the music.
But at the same time these entities want your money many times over and in as many ways as possible that they'll take such irrational actions such as suing the very people who are buying their products or changing formats the physical formats of the products every decade or so just to "keep up with technology".
The author's right - the penalities for "bad" behavior in an online format might work with some who have a community in the game, but for those who just want to be a dickhead, it's hard to do much other than ban them, since they have little emotionally wrapped up in the game.
You might be right and you might be wrong. Ask yourself this: What causes similiar bad behavior in the real-world? Most of the time, I've seen it rooted in some desire to draw attention to themselves. Could not this also apply to those who are playing on line? Not that I'm suggesting that such behavior is like that all of the time, as there are those who simply refuse to behave in a civilized manner, but still, there is more that goes in with human interaction than can be translated into a gaming experience.
Hi. I graduated with a degree of BS in CS a little over a year ago and have yet to get a stable IT position or some other software related job. I have been told several times now by recuiting agencies (those that acknowledge my existance, that is) and those that I have interviewed with that I am not employable because I have that degree. In short, they don't want people who have a degree because they are unwilling to pay for it. It's quite fustrating, really. This is after an approximate six month's (I was laid off from a part time server-sitting job in June) worth of calling, faxing, and emailing of resumes and more.
The question is amusing becuase of this same mixed message that keeps getting sent out. You want to get a degree so that you can be seen as promotable via vis you can continue to learn, etc. At the same time, those that want to hire know that you, I, and everybody else who have achieved an eduction expects to compesated at some level for bringing that to the bargining table. Yet there are those that are somewhat shy about telling you that an education puts you beyond their "needs" or "requirements" for the position.
The point being is this: If you are currently employeed in a more or less secure position ask your supervisor/manager/whatever if the company will help out in some way first. First of all, this can help to avoid the situation that I'm in right now. Secondly it can help keep the school bills a bit lower as most employers have some sort of program to help defray the costs (as at the same time they can benefit as you are earning your degree).
Well, not exactly splicing into the line. If I recall earlier articles on this subject correctly, the trasmission is achieved by modulating the electro-magetic feild that is created by the electricity. In fact there have been versions of this made for home networks and for the transmission of television signals for a while now. Anyway, you don't need to splice anything, you just need a good triangulation antena to read the feild surrounding the transmision wires going into your house. With those extra-high powered lines you probably don't have to be all that close to them to do the evesdropping.
Which, of course, brings up all sorts of questions about how much responsibility each party takes for the security of such things.
Slashdot Mirror
If I were to go back and reference say, the Altiar 8800, or some such, then I could see where one might consider a text program something of a luxary: The entirity of output to begin with were flashing LEDs. Likewise primitive, input was accomplished via switches. However, that is going a long ways back.
To do any sort of "computer thing" right now, one needs, at the very least, some sort of capacity to manipulate a plain old ascii text file. And this is where I think my disconnect comes in. I just don't see how one can call it a "non-computer thing" these days. The state of the Art of computing has come quite far in the 30 some years since the microcomputer was introduced. New things are being done all of the time. The difference I think, is what Burke pointed out in his "The Day the Universe Changed" series: That very little of this stuff is being done where the public can examine and participate.
I'm curious here...
What, exactly, do you mean by "non-computer things"? I'm having a bit of trouble de-coding that one becuase, well, it's very non-sensical. How can a computer do things that it is not capable of doing? Are you going back to the definition of "That which computes and tabulates"?
If that is the case, I for one, would like to have an example cited. I cannot see anything, from web-browing to game playing, in which a computer does not do computation.
I doubt EGM did anything more useful than taking out their old GameBoy and handed it to some editor's kid. This is going to be somebody who is throughly spoiled when it comes to the games they get to play. The latest releases on the latest hardware. Given that, no wonder the kids "mocked the tittles mercliessly". Not to mention if they put that on the cover how many more copies are going to be bought up by older gamers who may not have even like the rag to begin with.
I don't know...you might get a "funny" or two out of it.
"News 20 years from now: "This just in... McDonalds tastier than ever! More at 11." I only can hope something changes to destroy this trend by then.
The only thing which would ever change this trend is to get the people who own the newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters to quit with the funny idea that news is there to be manipulated into profits for themselves as well as others.
"So far, no one has found a road-and wheel combination in which the road has the same shape as the wheel."
Oh, yeah. Spatula City.
I don't know how bizzaro it is to you, but considering that most of the technology is already in place at the point of manufacture (ie, machines which count the number of pills at very high speeds, double check that against the known, discrete weight of each pill, and the weight of a filled bottle, other machines to move and sort the bottles according to what is being manufactured and so forth), the only dangerous varible I can think of is the placement of each bottle in the cabinents at the individual pharmacies -- which also can be controlled to a certain extent when the system is purchaced and in place -- I see no reason why a fully automated pharmacy couldn't exist.
I think the only thing keeping such from existing is people's lack of trust in those who craete such systems.
Well, think of it from a more profit-centric vein.
Once they get all of that in place, then it would be trivial to have what you need as your medication also on an RFID, which would be hooked up to a despensing machine of some sort, and *poof*! No humans needed in the process at all. Suddenly all of those millions of dollars being wasted on employing highly trained, well educated, people who do nothing but stand around all day to fill bottles (and destroy our profits), gone!
Given that we have one time use credit cards, a banking system which has a lot of wire transfer traffic on it, and a thousand other things that give us virtual* money...why trouble yourself with creating the real-world equilivant? As pointed out in numerous other posts, there are several things which you can do wrong which can catch you. Not to mention what this and other articles itself talks about and imply.
The trouble to learn the bank's electronic transfer systems as well as gaining access cannot be any harder than getting the proper equipment to pull off a good, large scale counterfeiting scheme. Let's not even go into how all most all banks still are very, very quiet when someone does do an electronic break in. It took the feds, what? Three years to get that bank in NY to fess up that the Russian mob had used fake electronic transfers to help launder billions of dollars?
*[With a fait money system, such as the one used in the US, the money is never back with a material component such as gold, silver, or diamonds. In essense, all such money not backed in that way is virtual since you can't look at a physical object and say that the value of the money and the value of the object are the same.]
Are you sure about that?
I for one do not believe for one second that our caveman ancestors would have gone anywhere near a glow-n-the-dark wolly mammoth.
It makes little sense to release a game system with extra goodies for the graphics and make it hard to use those same said goodies.
That, at least to my mind, brings up a very important concept which is lacking in American politics.
/. that is) there are a good many people who have a distinct dislike of much of the politics of the political. That in fact, wish they could choose such an option for their ballots so that their distaste for the choices presented in the elections could be recorded in some fashion. So does not the prospect of a vote, compiled, completed, and well, calculated by machines - which by their own designs are inherintly limited in capacity to understand the difference between a good, correct vote, an incomplete but not necessarily incorrect vote, and a purposefully spoiled vote (but a vote all the same) - doesn't that bother anybody?
It seems that in this forum (that forum being
Seriously, doesn't the push to these computerized voting procedures seem just a little too...pat in its conclusion?
I can just hear the politicans in a few years pushing these machines: "They're great! They'll always count the votes just right and we'll be able to get nearly instant results! You of the pulic will know instantly just who is going to fulfill your roll of leadership!"
What is going to happen with things like the spoiled ballots or being able to at least have a write-in canidate (in those last few areas which allow for such things)?
Ah! But the crux of that argument relies upon the user's perception of value. So far, portable game play != console level of game play. They would start out having to work up against that mentality which means having to have the lower prices that the GBA/SP games bring in right now.
The GC is already set to be portable. It has a frickin' handle on the back of it for you to hold! It has a smaller form factor than any thing since the PS1. And there are thrid party mini-screens for it just like the PS1.
Let's not even get into why Nintendo would want to cut into the well established, well running market of the Gameboy.
From what I heard, most of the complaints followed whatever was on the news that week. Teen drug use, alcohol, gangs, and even once, a claim that some girl got pregnant in there. Almost all of them were foundless. I don't think it helped matters any to realize that the arcade was three stores down from the Christian bookstore as well.
Parents always complained about the place, as parents are want to do. Not that anything ever went down there. The owners were parents themsevles and wanted to make sure it was just a fun place to hang out.
Long story short the mall they were located in got tired of hearing parental complaints so they forced them out by jacking up the stall price quarter after quarter after quarter until it got too pricy. About a year after it left, the mall sold the stall and the one next to it to a Fun Factory.
Now, the place is all lit up, bright and shiny, and costs three to four times as much for each game. There a couple of guys who stand behind the counter and occasionally play a game or two, but it is now home to a few mall rat gangs and has had more fights break out in the last couple of years over high scores than the old place ever did in its lifetime.
Just like the War on Drugs or the War on Terror, this is not there to help the acutal citizens of our country. This is designed to help transfer a great deal of money and freedoms away from individuals who might or might not be guilty of abusing a substance (in this case movies, music, and other forms of entertainment) to another group who already enjoys a good deal of both.
Think about it. What better way to garentee a lifetime of profits than setting up a proven model of business? Setup laws which have no chance of being enforced in a reasonable way, help create an even larger military-like police force, and then create a support and consultation industry for that new police force.
With this move, it seems that the existing cable industry *wants* to be labeled a telecommunication service. Quick! Somebody go tell the Ninth Circuit Court that it was right before it's too late!
Just how much does Hollywood really loose to the Indies and home copies?
No. Really. It can't be that much to begin with. Everybody I've known who wanted to make their own films, were film snobs to begin with. They saw two, maybe three movies at the mulitplex a year. Most of their film viewings went at the art house which doesn't pay the *AA a cent anyways.
Hollywood almost cut off their left foot by trying to get the VCR outlawed, and were ultimately shown that despite people dubbing off the occasional copy for friends and relatives was a very profitable thing. These are not stupid people (just incredibly greedy). They've already been shown that giving the public the ability to create the occasional copy helps them out in the long term.
They want us to watch these films.
They want us to hear the music.
But at the same time these entities want your money many times over and in as many ways as possible that they'll take such irrational actions such as suing the very people who are buying their products or changing formats the physical formats of the products every decade or so just to "keep up with technology".
The author's right - the penalities for "bad" behavior in an online format might work with some who have a community in the game, but for those who just want to be a dickhead, it's hard to do much other than ban them, since they have little emotionally wrapped up in the game.
You might be right and you might be wrong. Ask yourself this: What causes similiar bad behavior in the real-world? Most of the time, I've seen it rooted in some desire to draw attention to themselves. Could not this also apply to those who are playing on line? Not that I'm suggesting that such behavior is like that all of the time, as there are those who simply refuse to behave in a civilized manner, but still, there is more that goes in with human interaction than can be translated into a gaming experience.
The question is amusing becuase of this same mixed message that keeps getting sent out. You want to get a degree so that you can be seen as promotable via vis you can continue to learn, etc. At the same time, those that want to hire know that you, I, and everybody else who have achieved an eduction expects to compesated at some level for bringing that to the bargining table. Yet there are those that are somewhat shy about telling you that an education puts you beyond their "needs" or "requirements" for the position.
The point being is this: If you are currently employeed in a more or less secure position ask your supervisor/manager/whatever if the company will help out in some way first. First of all, this can help to avoid the situation that I'm in right now. Secondly it can help keep the school bills a bit lower as most employers have some sort of program to help defray the costs (as at the same time they can benefit as you are earning your degree).
Considering it was TW cable, who do you think wrote that one up?
Well, not exactly splicing into the line. If I recall earlier articles on this subject correctly, the trasmission is achieved by modulating the electro-magetic feild that is created by the electricity. In fact there have been versions of this made for home networks and for the transmission of television signals for a while now. Anyway, you don't need to splice anything, you just need a good triangulation antena to read the feild surrounding the transmision wires going into your house. With those extra-high powered lines you probably don't have to be all that close to them to do the evesdropping.
Which, of course, brings up all sorts of questions about how much responsibility each party takes for the security of such things.