Having lived near Red Lodge, Montana, I can attest that the most likely response there would be for some public-spirited citizen to shoot the emitter, and that would be the end of that.
Advertising is primarily about brand recognition (not about immediate sales). That's why some ads are not much more than a blaring or repetition of the company name and/or slogan, with no real information. The concept is that next time you go to buy whatever, you'll recognise their name and that makes it more likely what you'll purchase.
Imagine using this as a "Prince Albert in a can" nuisance -- with the "message" being anything from a cop siren to gunfire. The pranksterism will never end.
As to being able to "just walk away" from it... what if the target area happens to be in front of your apartment building or place of business, forcing you, or your customers, to pass through the ad willy-nilly?
Sonics are subject to waveform interference -- it wouldn't take much to counteract such beamed commands. However, I wonder if it might be useful *within* a tight-moving group, when radio silence is desirable?
Or how about if it interferes with a blind person's navigation-by-sound? Or with a service dog who interprets it as a command, or as a threat to avoid? how long before it gets someone killed?
As someone else points out, this is the sonic equivalent of having a penlight beamed into your eyes, with no ability to look away.
I think you've got it backwards. The problem is that middlemen have taken over, to the point that creators and end-users are both marginalized. Laws like the DMCA only make this situation worse. And I think it'll be a long, long haul before a significant shift goes back the other way.
I find it interesting how closely your "account for every dollar" scheme parallels the BSA's "account for every software license with a matching *receipt*" policy.
Yep, definitely time for congresscritters to have to live by the same rules they're letting corporations apply to honest citizens.
"If the industry really is losing money and can't afford to hire him, maybe he should be looking for work elsewhere."
Same as the buggy whip makers had to find new jobs as their industry petered out. Should we all be driving a horse-and-buggy to keep the buggy whip makers in business? Not to mention the hostlers, buggy makers, and road-apple collectors...
Me too... I've been dragging around a $50 Best Buy gift card for a couple years now. Every so often I go in there and try to spend it... and find either there's nothing I want, or even after the $50 off, whatever item is STILL way cheaper over at PC Club (where the store guys will actually know enough to help me out, too).
That certainly would work for me. I certainly couldn't be bothered to remove the ads for something I intended to view only once, or that I'm viewing for the first time -- and after that the ads are stale anyway (and they only get to foist 'em on you ONCE via broadcast, so this is no different) -- so if later on I want to make an ad-free copy, that shouldn't be an issue since they already got their pound of flesh.
As the other reply points out -- make the convenience factor outweigh everything else. Make the download and payment painless in every way -- easy to get to, easy to fetch, no worries about what it will burn to/play on, and a small enough fee that you don't think twice about buying it.
And as I've suggested before, watermarked downloads could conceivably be used in a subscription-and-micropayment P2P network, where you pay to acquire a file, AND *get paid* to host it, which would help maximize distribution and therefore the volume of micropayments.
Not only that, but it tells you where to target your DVD marketing, if a broadcast isn't practical, or v.v. as the case may be.
There are a number of shows I didn't even know *existed*, that I became aware of when I stumbled across a download... and if I like 'em, my next move will be to buy a set of DVDs for backups. How is this anything but pure profit to the content owners?!
That's a good point -- outfits like Dell and Gateway and HP are nothing if not tight with a dollar. They're willing to cut corners that cost half a cent per unit, because the unit can get away without it. So I believe you're right -- if they thought that linux really offered a desktop solution that would cost them nothing AND would preserve their market, they'd be on it like flies on shit, and M$ would suddenly be in the position of begging for OEM customers.
Regardless of the opinion held by slashdot groupthink, the market really DOES speak on stuff like this. When/if linux is truly ready for the masses, the OEMs will switch, BECAUSE IT WILL SAVE THEM MONEY WITHOUT COSTING THEM CUSTOMERS.
As to knowing the victim.. my first thought upon RTFAing was to wonder if the Overly Protective Father acted from, uh, personal experience. (Ie. illicit desires or acts toward his own kid.)
I've had dogs that recognised other breeds. Example: I took an 8 year old Lab to a weekend at the all-breed dog show. This was the first time in his life that he had EVER been around any other breed of dogs (except for my neighbour's Goldens), or even out in public at all. Over the course of the day he picked out five different breeds and did this "daddy, I want one!" act every time an individual of that breed walked by, while ignoring all other dogs (of the couple hundred individuals of 40+ breeds in immediate sight). Not even similar breeds, either -- he wanted a Pit Bull, one of the small hairless breeds (I forget if it was an American Hairless Terrier or a Xolo, but he only liked one of them, and these two breeds look a great deal alike), a Leonberger (huge hairy dog), a Coton (small furry white dog), and I forget what else. It was exactly like a kid in the toy store fixating on one particular toy, then forgetting about it entirely when some other toy catches his eye.
Anyway... it wouldn't surprise me at all if once a dog had the concept of "picture of another dog" it could also sort them by breed, and even possibly by individual dog (since in 3-D life, dogs have no trouble recognising individual dogs by sight, and can readily distinguish among very similar-looking individuals, too).
Dogs are pretty good at triangulating stuff. When I train working retrievers, one of the things I do is walk along with the dog wandering where he will, then every so often I throw the training dummy in some random direction, for the dog to retrieve. Almost 100% of the time, the dog will get the angle right even tho the dummy is still in the air when the dog goes for where it will land.
Experienced gundogs can also read river currents well enough to figure out how far down the bank they need to run to intercept a shot duck that's being swept downriver.
As to deceptiveness, I see this sort of thing in my kennel dogs all the time, as they try to fool one another into giving up a desired bedspot, or toy, or dinner (without getting into fights about it). It's simply an extrapolation of intelligent predator behaviour. I've had to teach some of 'em "Don't Steal!" as a command, so they don't steal everyone else's meals.
"Dog shape" is a fairly nebulous thing, given that dogs come in the widest array of physical types of any species on earth. Four legs and a head is the only common factor. Hair and tails are not universal. Size can be anything from 7 to 36 inches at the shoulder, with a similar range of mass, from 2 to 200 pounds. Proportions can range from a 1:1 length/height ratio, to as much as 3:1. At first contact, aliens would probably class dogs as several dozen different species. Despite all this, dogs do pretty well at recognising "that critter is a dog" -- just as children will, regardless of breed.
I've observed my show dogs picking out some particular breed and trying to follow it around -- and they can be quite specific about what they want, too (I have one dog who can tell two hairless breeds apart that look identical at a casual glance; he only likes one of 'em). And it's quite common for poodles to prefer the company of other poodles only in certain clips, as if that was more aesthetically appealing to the dog.
Fact is, a bright dog is on a par with a bright 5 or 6 year old human child, and per all evidence, thinks/observes pretty much the same stuff. -- My own theory is that intelligence levels are where you stop *developing*, and dogs just happen to stop sooner than humans.
You may have meant that to be funny, but the answer is -- yes, they can. Watch a bitch in heat unerringly pick the sole male out of a pack; she knows what she wants, even if he's ignoring her!
And some of 'em know which "parts" do the job, too... I had one bitch who'd get impatient if the male didn't "do her" RIGHT NOW, and if he took too long about it, she would grab him by the penis and drag him around!!
All dogs believe they're about 60 pounds, and behave accordingly. This make sense when you realise that at root they're just funny-looking wolves; size differences are merely cosmetic, and don't do much to alter their fundamental nature.
I do think the juvenile paranoia that's common in toy dogs is the result of a disconnect caused by their small size -- they're born believing the world should be proportioned differently than it is, and it takes them some time to "get used to" how overwhelming it looks from their miniaturized perspective, and meanwhile it scares them.
As to body language, yep, dogs read it very well; how you carry yourself telegraphs your intent and even your general mindset to the dog, clear as day. Not only re perps, but also in everyday life: Failure to exhibit "confident body language" is a major reason why some people just flat can't control perfectly trainable willing dogs, yet others can control unruly obstreperous beasts with ease.
Slashdot Mirror
Having lived near Red Lodge, Montana, I can attest that the most likely response there would be for some public-spirited citizen to shoot the emitter, and that would be the end of that.
Advertising is primarily about brand recognition (not about immediate sales). That's why some ads are not much more than a blaring or repetition of the company name and/or slogan, with no real information. The concept is that next time you go to buy whatever, you'll recognise their name and that makes it more likely what you'll purchase.
Imagine using this as a "Prince Albert in a can" nuisance -- with the "message" being anything from a cop siren to gunfire. The pranksterism will never end.
As to being able to "just walk away" from it... what if the target area happens to be in front of your apartment building or place of business, forcing you, or your customers, to pass through the ad willy-nilly?
I think it makes more sense to shoot advertisers.
Sonics are subject to waveform interference -- it wouldn't take much to counteract such beamed commands. However, I wonder if it might be useful *within* a tight-moving group, when radio silence is desirable?
Or how about if it interferes with a blind person's navigation-by-sound? Or with a service dog who interprets it as a command, or as a threat to avoid? how long before it gets someone killed?
As someone else points out, this is the sonic equivalent of having a penlight beamed into your eyes, with no ability to look away.
I think you've got it backwards. The problem is that middlemen have taken over, to the point that creators and end-users are both marginalized. Laws like the DMCA only make this situation worse. And I think it'll be a long, long haul before a significant shift goes back the other way.
More to the point, are there enough geeks who will contribute to his next campaign chest??
Cuz that's what you've got to match: contributions from Hollywood and related interests.
The solution is obvious. Get rid of Hollywood... thus, no more Hollywood district, and no need of a congresscritter from Hollywood!
I'm sure the smallest available tactical nuke would be more than sufficient.
I find it interesting how closely your "account for every dollar" scheme parallels the BSA's "account for every software license with a matching *receipt*" policy.
Yep, definitely time for congresscritters to have to live by the same rules they're letting corporations apply to honest citizens.
All true. And:
"If the industry really is losing money and can't afford to hire him, maybe he should be looking for work elsewhere."
Same as the buggy whip makers had to find new jobs as their industry petered out. Should we all be driving a horse-and-buggy to keep the buggy whip makers in business? Not to mention the hostlers, buggy makers, and road-apple collectors...
They wouldn't do it for PC Club, tho... only major chain stores and newspaper ads, last I asked.
Me too... I've been dragging around a $50 Best Buy gift card for a couple years now. Every so often I go in there and try to spend it... and find either there's nothing I want, or even after the $50 off, whatever item is STILL way cheaper over at PC Club (where the store guys will actually know enough to help me out, too).
I dunno about that, but here it is 10 hours after TFA hit slashdot, and I'm getting this:
=======
We are currently unable to serve your request
We apologize, but an error occurred and your request could not be completed.
This error has been logged. If you have additional information that you believe may have caused this error please report the problem here. [link]
That certainly would work for me. I certainly couldn't be bothered to remove the ads for something I intended to view only once, or that I'm viewing for the first time -- and after that the ads are stale anyway (and they only get to foist 'em on you ONCE via broadcast, so this is no different) -- so if later on I want to make an ad-free copy, that shouldn't be an issue since they already got their pound of flesh.
As the other reply points out -- make the convenience factor outweigh everything else. Make the download and payment painless in every way -- easy to get to, easy to fetch, no worries about what it will burn to/play on, and a small enough fee that you don't think twice about buying it.
And as I've suggested before, watermarked downloads could conceivably be used in a subscription-and-micropayment P2P network, where you pay to acquire a file, AND *get paid* to host it, which would help maximize distribution and therefore the volume of micropayments.
Not only that, but it tells you where to target your DVD marketing, if a broadcast isn't practical, or v.v. as the case may be.
There are a number of shows I didn't even know *existed*, that I became aware of when I stumbled across a download... and if I like 'em, my next move will be to buy a set of DVDs for backups. How is this anything but pure profit to the content owners?!
That's a good point -- outfits like Dell and Gateway and HP are nothing if not tight with a dollar. They're willing to cut corners that cost half a cent per unit, because the unit can get away without it. So I believe you're right -- if they thought that linux really offered a desktop solution that would cost them nothing AND would preserve their market, they'd be on it like flies on shit, and M$ would suddenly be in the position of begging for OEM customers.
Regardless of the opinion held by slashdot groupthink, the market really DOES speak on stuff like this. When/if linux is truly ready for the masses, the OEMs will switch, BECAUSE IT WILL SAVE THEM MONEY WITHOUT COSTING THEM CUSTOMERS.
As to knowing the victim.. my first thought upon RTFAing was to wonder if the Overly Protective Father acted from, uh, personal experience. (Ie. illicit desires or acts toward his own kid.)
I'd like to know how this is intrinsically different from those lists of targ^H^H^H^H physicians published by anti-abortion fanatics.
I've had dogs that recognised other breeds. Example: I took an 8 year old Lab to a weekend at the all-breed dog show. This was the first time in his life that he had EVER been around any other breed of dogs (except for my neighbour's Goldens), or even out in public at all. Over the course of the day he picked out five different breeds and did this "daddy, I want one!" act every time an individual of that breed walked by, while ignoring all other dogs (of the couple hundred individuals of 40+ breeds in immediate sight). Not even similar breeds, either -- he wanted a Pit Bull, one of the small hairless breeds (I forget if it was an American Hairless Terrier or a Xolo, but he only liked one of them, and these two breeds look a great deal alike), a Leonberger (huge hairy dog), a Coton (small furry white dog), and I forget what else. It was exactly like a kid in the toy store fixating on one particular toy, then forgetting about it entirely when some other toy catches his eye.
Anyway... it wouldn't surprise me at all if once a dog had the concept of "picture of another dog" it could also sort them by breed, and even possibly by individual dog (since in 3-D life, dogs have no trouble recognising individual dogs by sight, and can readily distinguish among very similar-looking individuals, too).
Dogs are pretty good at triangulating stuff. When I train working retrievers, one of the things I do is walk along with the dog wandering where he will, then every so often I throw the training dummy in some random direction, for the dog to retrieve. Almost 100% of the time, the dog will get the angle right even tho the dummy is still in the air when the dog goes for where it will land.
Experienced gundogs can also read river currents well enough to figure out how far down the bank they need to run to intercept a shot duck that's being swept downriver.
As to deceptiveness, I see this sort of thing in my kennel dogs all the time, as they try to fool one another into giving up a desired bedspot, or toy, or dinner (without getting into fights about it). It's simply an extrapolation of intelligent predator behaviour. I've had to teach some of 'em "Don't Steal!" as a command, so they don't steal everyone else's meals.
"Dog shape" is a fairly nebulous thing, given that dogs come in the widest array of physical types of any species on earth. Four legs and a head is the only common factor. Hair and tails are not universal. Size can be anything from 7 to 36 inches at the shoulder, with a similar range of mass, from 2 to 200 pounds. Proportions can range from a 1:1 length/height ratio, to as much as 3:1. At first contact, aliens would probably class dogs as several dozen different species. Despite all this, dogs do pretty well at recognising "that critter is a dog" -- just as children will, regardless of breed.
I've observed my show dogs picking out some particular breed and trying to follow it around -- and they can be quite specific about what they want, too (I have one dog who can tell two hairless breeds apart that look identical at a casual glance; he only likes one of 'em). And it's quite common for poodles to prefer the company of other poodles only in certain clips, as if that was more aesthetically appealing to the dog.
Fact is, a bright dog is on a par with a bright 5 or 6 year old human child, and per all evidence, thinks/observes pretty much the same stuff. -- My own theory is that intelligence levels are where you stop *developing*, and dogs just happen to stop sooner than humans.
You may have meant that to be funny, but the answer is -- yes, they can. Watch a bitch in heat unerringly pick the sole male out of a pack; she knows what she wants, even if he's ignoring her!
And some of 'em know which "parts" do the job, too... I had one bitch who'd get impatient if the male didn't "do her" RIGHT NOW, and if he took too long about it, she would grab him by the penis and drag him around!!
[pro dog trainer hat]
All dogs believe they're about 60 pounds, and behave accordingly. This make sense when you realise that at root they're just funny-looking wolves; size differences are merely cosmetic, and don't do much to alter their fundamental nature.
I do think the juvenile paranoia that's common in toy dogs is the result of a disconnect caused by their small size -- they're born believing the world should be proportioned differently than it is, and it takes them some time to "get used to" how overwhelming it looks from their miniaturized perspective, and meanwhile it scares them.
As to body language, yep, dogs read it very well; how you carry yourself telegraphs your intent and even your general mindset to the dog, clear as day. Not only re perps, but also in everyday life: Failure to exhibit "confident body language" is a major reason why some people just flat can't control perfectly trainable willing dogs, yet others can control unruly obstreperous beasts with ease.