The difference is that Budweiser knows they're being outmoded which is how and why they're part of the single largest brewer in the world. Craft beer has eaten so much of their market, the most regulators didn't blink at the purchase since they've been losing market share for years. Budweiser reacted to the changes in their market in order to stay in business.
Apple actively tries to keep the market from changing instead of adapting. The MacPro is evidence of that. Once the darling of the graphics and music producers it's been left behind as Apple continues to ignore that segment.
Batra is tapping the brains and phones of some of Google's billions of users. His team built an app called Crowdsource that asks people to perform quick tasks like checking the accuracy of Google's image-recognition and translation algorithms. Starting this week, the Crowdsource app also asks users to take and upload photos of nearby objects.... Google isnâ(TM)t offering to share that potential bounty with people contributing data to Crowdsource. The app rewards contributors with a system of points, badges, and certificates. Collect enough and youâ(TM)ll be invited to join online chats with other top contributors via Googleâ(TM)s Hangouts service.
Hey. Look at that. American ingenuity at it's finest. Get the people to work for free or as close to it as you can. I can see the pitch now!
"The wisdom of the crowds at your fingertips, free to us but let me talk to you about the down payment you need to engage the greatest engineering feet designed by man. Hopefully you've not already a second mortgage on that house, my friend, your small business is going to need what we can do for you. Without it, you'll never see the top of the search heap. Nosiree. You'll. Never. See. The. Top."
Which is likely part of their plan. To keep dragging this out until it doesn't matter or the people behind it give up. And considering that a lot of their customers are the elderly, the second might happen a lot quicker than the former.
Are these 2012 or 2014 i5s or i7s? Xeons, are they the server or high end desktop kinds. Did HP or IBM use them in their products? Where should I be looking for more information guys?
And it's an old hack that lasts about as long as the trend you've attached yourself to does. So unless you can get some hookers and blackjack going as well, I hope you have a plan C when people move on to other distractions.
There has to be a better way to decommission and retire these spacecraft. Letting them hang in orbit until they burn up in atmo seems like a waste. Not only in gross terms of material but in the ability to celebrate their discoveries. Why are we trying to find a way to bring them back to earth so we can study what space did to them (and thus make the next one better) but so that we can put them somewhere the public can have a better understanding of what we learned?
Sensation hacking might be a new kink, but what about actually controlling it? What kind of new fun/trouble might that bring?
"Can't let you near the president, ma'am, your prosthetic hasn't been secured with the latest microcode. If you would please turn it off and use your left hand when you greet him, the secret service would appreciate it."
Outside of a few enclaves, there's little push to make games connected online. Those enclaves tend to be centered around large media companies.
Don't get me wrong, I've done plenty of multiplayer, but I don't like it exclusively. I'd rather the devs spend an extra six months polishing gameplay over polishing netcode. Or give the networking funds over to the story devs so I can have some of my in-game actions reflected meaningfully in the story. None of this pallet-swapped outfit or "moral compass" bull. Meaningful reflection.
That's probably more than enough for the VC and other investors. They want as much marketshare as they can get while the getting is both cheap and the PR is good. They want to turn this into as much a monopoly as they can. Displacing traditional taxis and public transportation in the minds of the public so that when they've reached a monopoly position they can extract as much money as they can.
How do they plan on imposing a filter across state lines? I get how they can essentially tax online porn but it doesn't work like going down to your local gas station or adult store and picking up a few skin mags or videos. Especially all the free stuff.
I'd like some details as to how they're asking the ISPs to implement this. I need a good laugh.
throughout history. It's a matter of educating and letting people make up their own minds based on that.
For myself, I'm pretty happy following Asimov's three laws with a heaping helping of the zeroth law on top. Yeah, your answers to them can get pretty abstract when you pursue them into special cases but on the whole? Sound, very sound reasoning.
Where I plug in and have all of the cameras piped directly in my brain?
I hate blind spots and having to turn my head to triple check I'm not pulling into someone. An extra mid-body camera would do wonders for getting rid of that anxiety.
Because the newspaper model was predicated on a race to the bottom. At the turn of the 20th century, those in charge of newspapers just wanted the public to want them, much like how websites just want an audience now. They priced accordingly. A nickel, a dime, a quarter. That's what they thought people would pay for a paper at the time. But that was never enough to actually pay for the paper, let alone make a profit.
That model never changed.
That's the hell the newspapers find themselves in. Those in charge don't want to have to put the true cost of a subscription out there out of fear that no one will buy it. At the same time advertising pricing has fallen to nearly nothing, thanks to online ads being monopolized by Google. No one wants to change because of fear of being the first, fear of failure, fear of losing their job, fear of retaliation from everyone else who didn't follow. Fear, fear, fear.
I have YT:Red is because I subscribe to google music streaming. That's it. I wouldn't pay for it otherwise. I also suspect that this is the case for the vast majority of people who have the service.
Which means, yes, YT:Red is indeed a music service.
That's what the big money on Wall Street sees. It sees a future where one or a small number of companies have the public over a barrel in terms of public transport. With few options and fewer publicly owned projects, we will have little choice but to take them up on their charges and fees.
So right now, they will tolerate the so-called loss of a few billion dollars. They can write part of it off as the cost of doing business, they can shuffle more profitable parts of their dealings such that it washes out to zero, or other accounting wizardry so it doesn't hurt them right now. In a few years or decades, whatever it takes - they have the time - it will work.
Now as much as the crowd here likes to shout that word at the drop of a hat, we're looking a the real deal this time. At the very least this easily fits into the idea of prior restraint. You are asking for the government to deny access to part of a communication system based on notion of what you think is going on in commercial terms. There's no overriding government secrets to enforce, no defense materials at stake. Purely commercial.
That right there is more than enough to drive a stake through its heart if the Copyright office had any sense at all.
throughout lobbying, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. There are no depths to which those versed in averace will not sink in order to satiate their perverse desires. If it means having to prop up puppet groups, just like the far right has done numerous times, in order to find such "family friendly" advocates then let them. Let them do it so we can mock them and point out their lack of clothes.
It's that second part which is more important. There is no pity to spend here. Mocking laughter is the only cure for this ailment.
and the company needs to die. There is no other remedy that will purge all of the greed that this institution has used to justify this behavior. It cannot be effectively punished which will otherwise correct or otherwise bring it back into a socially acceptable direction.
It's far past time to institute a corporate death penalty. With the courts neutered w.r.t. other financial remedies, this is what we are left with.
The situation sucks. Not only in the present but it was make the future suck as well because everyone caught in it are going to feel a crunch come retirement, if they ever do get to retire. There's no guarantees with the mighty 401(k) and IRA that are tied to market forces which we have no command or control over.
There are structural problems with our society that allow this to happen. It's not only coded in our employment laws but also in the anti-union bent of corporate profit imperatives. We want people to take responsibility for their own success but remove every single tool that might be used for that through black-letter law or through making it so expensive in seeking redress of wrongs it become untenable, even in principle, to see it done. We allow for unilateral NDAs to be upheld. We allow for so much to be hidden away that even if I were to invest the time (as if I had the time to invest) looking into a potential employer, I wouldn't find be able to find the problems they have.
So what do you want us to talk about here? We know about it. We work as well as we can within it. There's public outcry but no political will to do anything. This is the endpoint of 40 years of corporate political influence. What's there to be surprised about it?
If you're being honest, then I'll counter with the following:
It's not the number that's being copyrighted. It's the method of generating the number which is trying to be protected. That is we're looking not at the result, but the implementation.
If you can prove that you came up with a different means than the musician or artist used which results in the same output as they did, then by all means you should be awarded an equal copyright for the product. One caveat is that you cannot, through any means, use their work as a starting point to come to yours. No dividing by one, so to speak. Or any continual transformation of which the net result would be equivalent to dividing by one. That's not clever. It's simply annoying and isn't particularly germain to the conversation.
Furthermore, a digital representation isn't the only thing protected under copyright. There is more to it than simply numbers. Ignoring that aspect of copyright isn't going to get you anywhere in an honest conversation on this topic. So just because we have this means to encoding data to make it easier to transport digitally doesn't mean that copyright should suddenly evaporate. Treated differently, perhaps - so long as we're able to figure out a compromise so that all parties are equally aggrieved by the results. Maybe Playboy doesn't like the fact that it's a straightforward and simple process to scan and transmit their data. Or having a publicly readable signpost at a busy intersection is an ideal way for their continued business. But pretending that there isn't work involved in the creation of their images is just as ignorant as their asking BoingBoing to take down the link.
I don't see it all that short term thinking. This is definitely part of a larger picture, a longer termed plan.
Get this wedge in now, this idea that some authority should have all the keys to the encryption kingdom, and it should be easier to keep it there when the next privacy scheme comes along. Otherwise it's a doubly hard fight the next time. You have to convince more people that the authorities are correct to want it. Do it now, when it is of less concern.
It works because alcohol had always been something akin to a legal right for all classes before tea-totalers came along. Getting high off a plant, on the other hand, was looked down upon by the ruling class and mostly of the domain of the underclass. You don't need the same force of law to forbid that versus something that you know the upper classes partake of.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that Budweiser knows they're being outmoded which is how and why they're part of the single largest brewer in the world. Craft beer has eaten so much of their market, the most regulators didn't blink at the purchase since they've been losing market share for years. Budweiser reacted to the changes in their market in order to stay in business.
Apple actively tries to keep the market from changing instead of adapting. The MacPro is evidence of that. Once the darling of the graphics and music producers it's been left behind as Apple continues to ignore that segment.
Batra is tapping the brains and phones of some of Google's billions of users. His team built an app called Crowdsource that asks people to perform quick tasks like checking the accuracy of Google's image-recognition and translation algorithms. Starting this week, the Crowdsource app also asks users to take and upload photos of nearby objects. ...
Google isnâ(TM)t offering to share that potential bounty with people contributing data to Crowdsource. The app rewards contributors with a system of points, badges, and certificates. Collect enough and youâ(TM)ll be invited to join online chats with other top contributors via Googleâ(TM)s Hangouts service.
Hey. Look at that. American ingenuity at it's finest. Get the people to work for free or as close to it as you can. I can see the pitch now!
"The wisdom of the crowds at your fingertips, free to us but let me talk to you about the down payment you need to engage the greatest engineering feet designed by man. Hopefully you've not already a second mortgage on that house, my friend, your small business is going to need what we can do for you. Without it, you'll never see the top of the search heap. Nosiree. You'll. Never. See. The. Top."
Which is likely part of their plan. To keep dragging this out until it doesn't matter or the people behind it give up. And considering that a lot of their customers are the elderly, the second might happen a lot quicker than the former.
Can we get a run down of the retail names for these CPUs? I feel like Intel is running a fast one on us through these code names.
Bloomfield, Bloomfield Xeon, Clarksfield, Gulftown, Harpertown Xeon C0, Harpertown Xeon E0, Jasper Forest, Penryn/QC, SoFIA 3GR, Wolfdale C0, Wolfdale M0, Wolfdale E0, Wolfdale R0, Wolfdale Xeon C0, Wolfdale Xeon E0, Yorkfield, and Yorkfield Xeon
Are these 2012 or 2014 i5s or i7s? Xeons, are they the server or high end desktop kinds. Did HP or IBM use them in their products? Where should I be looking for more information guys?
And it's an old hack that lasts about as long as the trend you've attached yourself to does. So unless you can get some hookers and blackjack going as well, I hope you have a plan C when people move on to other distractions.
Because otherwise how are we going to be able to afford all these now more expensive trinkets and toys?
Oh. Wait. We're not supposed to. It's supposed to further expand the wealth gap and pretty much finish off the US middle class.
There has to be a better way to decommission and retire these spacecraft. Letting them hang in orbit until they burn up in atmo seems like a waste. Not only in gross terms of material but in the ability to celebrate their discoveries. Why are we trying to find a way to bring them back to earth so we can study what space did to them (and thus make the next one better) but so that we can put them somewhere the public can have a better understanding of what we learned?
Sensation hacking might be a new kink, but what about actually controlling it? What kind of new fun/trouble might that bring?
"Can't let you near the president, ma'am, your prosthetic hasn't been secured with the latest microcode. If you would please turn it off and use your left hand when you greet him, the secret service would appreciate it."
Outside of a few enclaves, there's little push to make games connected online. Those enclaves tend to be centered around large media companies.
Don't get me wrong, I've done plenty of multiplayer, but I don't like it exclusively. I'd rather the devs spend an extra six months polishing gameplay over polishing netcode. Or give the networking funds over to the story devs so I can have some of my in-game actions reflected meaningfully in the story. None of this pallet-swapped outfit or "moral compass" bull. Meaningful reflection.
That's probably more than enough for the VC and other investors. They want as much marketshare as they can get while the getting is both cheap and the PR is good. They want to turn this into as much a monopoly as they can. Displacing traditional taxis and public transportation in the minds of the public so that when they've reached a monopoly position they can extract as much money as they can.
That's the plan.
How do they plan on imposing a filter across state lines? I get how they can essentially tax online porn but it doesn't work like going down to your local gas station or adult store and picking up a few skin mags or videos. Especially all the free stuff.
I'd like some details as to how they're asking the ISPs to implement this. I need a good laugh.
Seriously. How? How did anyone at any level of the company think this was a good idea for long enough that it made it out into public view?
Talk about being asleep at the wheel. How many in management are now going to claim ignorance when confronted with this?
throughout history. It's a matter of educating and letting people make up their own minds based on that.
For myself, I'm pretty happy following Asimov's three laws with a heaping helping of the zeroth law on top. Yeah, your answers to them can get pretty abstract when you pursue them into special cases but on the whole? Sound, very sound reasoning.
Where I plug in and have all of the cameras piped directly in my brain?
I hate blind spots and having to turn my head to triple check I'm not pulling into someone. An extra mid-body camera would do wonders for getting rid of that anxiety.
I mean what the hell?
Because the newspaper model was predicated on a race to the bottom. At the turn of the 20th century, those in charge of newspapers just wanted the public to want them, much like how websites just want an audience now. They priced accordingly. A nickel, a dime, a quarter. That's what they thought people would pay for a paper at the time. But that was never enough to actually pay for the paper, let alone make a profit.
That model never changed.
That's the hell the newspapers find themselves in. Those in charge don't want to have to put the true cost of a subscription out there out of fear that no one will buy it. At the same time advertising pricing has fallen to nearly nothing, thanks to online ads being monopolized by Google. No one wants to change because of fear of being the first, fear of failure, fear of losing their job, fear of retaliation from everyone else who didn't follow. Fear, fear, fear.
I have YT:Red is because I subscribe to google music streaming. That's it. I wouldn't pay for it otherwise. I also suspect that this is the case for the vast majority of people who have the service.
Which means, yes, YT:Red is indeed a music service.
Or an ogolopy.
That's what the big money on Wall Street sees. It sees a future where one or a small number of companies have the public over a barrel in terms of public transport. With few options and fewer publicly owned projects, we will have little choice but to take them up on their charges and fees.
So right now, they will tolerate the so-called loss of a few billion dollars. They can write part of it off as the cost of doing business, they can shuffle more profitable parts of their dealings such that it washes out to zero, or other accounting wizardry so it doesn't hurt them right now. In a few years or decades, whatever it takes - they have the time - it will work.
This is how the ultra-wealthy stays that way.
And would be government censorship.
Now as much as the crowd here likes to shout that word at the drop of a hat, we're looking a the real deal this time. At the very least this easily fits into the idea of prior restraint. You are asking for the government to deny access to part of a communication system based on notion of what you think is going on in commercial terms. There's no overriding government secrets to enforce, no defense materials at stake. Purely commercial.
That right there is more than enough to drive a stake through its heart if the Copyright office had any sense at all.
throughout lobbying, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. There are no depths to which those versed in averace will not sink in order to satiate their perverse desires. If it means having to prop up puppet groups, just like the far right has done numerous times, in order to find such "family friendly" advocates then let them. Let them do it so we can mock them and point out their lack of clothes.
It's that second part which is more important. There is no pity to spend here. Mocking laughter is the only cure for this ailment.
The judge gave the US prosecutor all the evidence Waymo had on the guy. Give it some time for them to get their own investigation completed.
and the company needs to die. There is no other remedy that will purge all of the greed that this institution has used to justify this behavior. It cannot be effectively punished which will otherwise correct or otherwise bring it back into a socially acceptable direction.
It's far past time to institute a corporate death penalty. With the courts neutered w.r.t. other financial remedies, this is what we are left with.
The situation sucks. Not only in the present but it was make the future suck as well because everyone caught in it are going to feel a crunch come retirement, if they ever do get to retire. There's no guarantees with the mighty 401(k) and IRA that are tied to market forces which we have no command or control over.
There are structural problems with our society that allow this to happen. It's not only coded in our employment laws but also in the anti-union bent of corporate profit imperatives. We want people to take responsibility for their own success but remove every single tool that might be used for that through black-letter law or through making it so expensive in seeking redress of wrongs it become untenable, even in principle, to see it done. We allow for unilateral NDAs to be upheld. We allow for so much to be hidden away that even if I were to invest the time (as if I had the time to invest) looking into a potential employer, I wouldn't find be able to find the problems they have.
So what do you want us to talk about here? We know about it. We work as well as we can within it. There's public outcry but no political will to do anything. This is the endpoint of 40 years of corporate political influence. What's there to be surprised about it?
If you're being honest, then I'll counter with the following:
It's not the number that's being copyrighted. It's the method of generating the number which is trying to be protected. That is we're looking not at the result, but the implementation.
If you can prove that you came up with a different means than the musician or artist used which results in the same output as they did, then by all means you should be awarded an equal copyright for the product. One caveat is that you cannot, through any means, use their work as a starting point to come to yours. No dividing by one, so to speak. Or any continual transformation of which the net result would be equivalent to dividing by one. That's not clever. It's simply annoying and isn't particularly germain to the conversation.
Furthermore, a digital representation isn't the only thing protected under copyright. There is more to it than simply numbers. Ignoring that aspect of copyright isn't going to get you anywhere in an honest conversation on this topic. So just because we have this means to encoding data to make it easier to transport digitally doesn't mean that copyright should suddenly evaporate. Treated differently, perhaps - so long as we're able to figure out a compromise so that all parties are equally aggrieved by the results. Maybe Playboy doesn't like the fact that it's a straightforward and simple process to scan and transmit their data. Or having a publicly readable signpost at a busy intersection is an ideal way for their continued business. But pretending that there isn't work involved in the creation of their images is just as ignorant as their asking BoingBoing to take down the link.
I don't see it all that short term thinking. This is definitely part of a larger picture, a longer termed plan.
Get this wedge in now, this idea that some authority should have all the keys to the encryption kingdom, and it should be easier to keep it there when the next privacy scheme comes along. Otherwise it's a doubly hard fight the next time. You have to convince more people that the authorities are correct to want it. Do it now, when it is of less concern.
It works because alcohol had always been something akin to a legal right for all classes before tea-totalers came along. Getting high off a plant, on the other hand, was looked down upon by the ruling class and mostly of the domain of the underclass. You don't need the same force of law to forbid that versus something that you know the upper classes partake of.