There is a little egoism in Slashdot that irritates me in discussions like this. We are the ultimate niche market. Nobody panders to us, because we don't spend any money on media anyway.
Ultimately, EVERYONE on the internet is a niche market of ONE.
As for not spending on content (or software) or whatever - like everyone else, we spend on what we want. I buy books, but I won't buy a Kindle. I use open-source software nowadays, but I have bought lots of software in the past, and if Borland had made a proper native compiler for linux instead of that carp called Kylix, I'd have been ready to fork over a grand for it, no complaints... I didn't buy a game console for more than a decade, but this year I spent a couple of grand on a Wii, accessories, and a couple dozen games.
But would I pay for youtube? That piece of shit? No. My life wouldn't be different if youtube were to disappear.
Because really, that's what this boils down to - bureaucrats circle jerking to the "oh look at how great we are now with this latest shiny project." Never mind that it violates people's privacy on a wholesale basis.
A good operative will not only be supplying info on who's doing what, but also on local sentiments, trends, etc. This can be valuable when deciding where to look, what policies are working and what are backfiring, etc.
I have better things to do with my time... erm... like post on slashdot.
Seriously, never, no, nada, nein, nyet, or as we say in Soviet Kanuckistan, "No fucking way, eh!"
Not everything can be monetized - and not everything that you can extract a revenue stream from will generate a profit. "First we get the eyeballs, then we figure out how to make money from it" is dead, Jim.
True, but this doesn't sound like it needs that much skill to do it. Also can't this sort of thing be automated?
They tried that, but the computer grokked some robot hentai porn and went into an infinite loop, with the dvd drive just sliding in and out and in and out and in and out...
So you should be allowed to choose milk laced with melamine? Meat with salmonella? Rancid Starkist tuna?
The tainted Star-Kist tuna scandal
Broadcast Date: Sept. 17, 1985
What became known as "Tunagate" erupts after this Fifth Estate report airs on Sept. 17, 1985. The CBC's Eric Malling reveals that Progressive Conservative Fisheries Minister John Fraser had knowingly approved a million cans of rancid Star-Kist tuna for sale. Fraser ignored numerous reports declaring that the tuna with the "powerful smell" was unfit for human consumption. Star-Kist Canada Inc. and New Brunswick Premier Richard Hatfield were pressuring Fraser in order to protect the 400 jobs at the St. Andrew's, N.B., plant.
Before Tunagate, Star-Kist, the largest employer in New Brunswick's Charlotte County, had enjoyed a 39 per cent market share. But that share collapsed to near zero following the scandal. The company eventually pulled out of Canada and the 400 employees at the St. Andrew's, N.B., plant lost their jobs.
Just when and how much Prime Minister Brian Mulroney knew about the events leading up to Tunagate was never made clear. Mulroney initially said he knew about the decision to sell the tainted tuna but later recanted, saying he only learned about the affair when the CBC's The Fifth Estate story aired. Mulroney was also accused by the Opposition of not telling the whole truth when he told the New York Times he had fired Fraser as soon as he had heard of the affair. In fact, it had taken six days.
Weeks after the Tunagate scandal broke, baseball fans booed Mulroney during the opening game of the American League championship playoffs in Toronto by chanting: "Tuna! Tuna! Tuna!"
No, publishers should and do exercise editorial and quality controls over the content that they publish. CNN is a publisher. If I write a news article, should I be able to get it published as news if I pay them enough money?
Never happen. Fox would sue them for infringement of their business methods.
But you're right - the publisher hires the editor(s), contracts with printers and distributors, etc.
That would be like suing HP for selling the Laserjets that were used to print it.
Nope - the publisher actually gets to see the content before publishing it. What if they put out a magazine full of kiddie porn? Could they claim "we only publish it?" Didn't think so.
You're confusing the publisher with the printer. The publisher is responsible for hiring the editors (you know, the people who are supposed to be reviewing what's published - unless it's slashdot), etc., and will contract with a printing company for the actual print run.
Haven't you ever seen "How to Get Ahead in Advertising?" Placebos are for beginners. The real experts first make you actually suffer a problem (ostensibly self-induced), then they start selling you the cure.
Like the fich company that, for some reason, their salmon was white instead of pink, so they advertised it as "guaranteed not to turn pink in the can."
A true claim, but still unethical.
Or cigarette manufacturers early claims that smoking would help you lose weight - how much does a lung weigh?
Excellent summary of the situation, but you can be sure that someone is going to view it as unpatriotic to even suggest that foreign policy is fatally flawed - "we can't afford to look weak" or some such nonsense. Only the weak and the bullies can't afford to look weak.
You can't appeal to someone's idealism if you yourself are perceived as something less than an "honest broker."
Eve better is that it's more energy efficient, has its' own built-in UPS, is quiet, and you can plug in an external keyboard and mouse (either into the laptop or the monitor) and hide the laptop (or duct-tape it to the back of the lcd screen - sort of like a poor man's iMac.
Most newer laptops have a connection for both an external monitor and an s-video out. For less than the cost of a new laptop display, you can get a much bigger desktop screen.
No, but it means spending on people in the field, rather than generating big hi-tech budgets with cool buzz-words, and your own personal fiefdom. Security takes second seat to "oh, shiny." Always has (just look at car designers resistance to incorporating safety features).
"Aim that at me and I'll kill you." -- Jame Retief, "Retief's War"
That has GOT to be one of the best multi-book characters in Sci-Fi. Sure, the stories are a bit pulpy (okay, they're a LOT pulpy, and quite camp), but they're fun "Pulp (sci)-Fiction."
If you see the stories, it's all about "Android" cell phones. Google, and now their partners, went out of their way to raise the public profile of the operating system. eg: "Motorola to introduce Android cell phones."
Google - accidental misspelling of googol. According to Google's vice president, as quoted on a BBC The Money Programme documentary, January 2006, the founders - noted for their poor spelling - registered Google as a trademark and web address before someone pointed out that it was not correct.
Hey, maybe they should have mis-spelled it as "Andruid" - they could have had a tie-in with the Boston Celtics. Or "Endroid" and hooked up with Preparation H. ("Shitty cell phone service? Use Endroid"). Or A-roid - the "Cell phone on steroids".
might be a good idea, epidemiologically speaking, to catch the flu now vs. later.
That's silly: why would the solution to eradicating a disease be catching it when it's already out there?
The real problem, which the original poster failed to note, is that the reason why catching the flu one year gives only a limited window of immunity (1 to 3 years) is because after a few years, the flue virus has mutated enough so that the body's immune system doesn't recognize it.
Better to just wash your hands, teach little kids (and adults at stop lights*) not to pick their boogers and wipe it on the walls, don't share mice, keyboards, or phones, etc.
*- I don't know how many times I've pulled up to a light and the person in the next car has a finger jammed up their nose. They probably also do this wile driving down the road. There's got to be some people who have had accidents because of this - so when their air bag goes off, does it jam their finger up into their brain?).
And taser, despite what they want to say, has now entered the language as a generic term. It's used not just as a product name, but as a verb ("I will tase you. bro!").
Slashdot Mirror
News: Norway Trying Out Laptops For High School School Exams
Here, let me fix that. Let's go all the way:
News News: Norway Norway Trying Trying Out Out Laptops Laptops For For High High School School Exams Exams
Now you can read the headline in STEREO (be happy it's not quadraphonic or 7.1 surround sound :-)
no product is going to want to be placed next to a monkey urinating in his own mouth.
Not even breath mints?
"Mommy, mommy, Marvin's eating all the mints out of the urinals again!"
There is a little egoism in Slashdot that irritates me in discussions like this. We are the ultimate niche market. Nobody panders to us, because we don't spend any money on media anyway.
Ultimately, EVERYONE on the internet is a niche market of ONE.
As for not spending on content (or software) or whatever - like everyone else, we spend on what we want. I buy books, but I won't buy a Kindle. I use open-source software nowadays, but I have bought lots of software in the past, and if Borland had made a proper native compiler for linux instead of that carp called Kylix, I'd have been ready to fork over a grand for it, no complaints ... I didn't buy a game console for more than a decade, but this year I spent a couple of grand on a Wii, accessories, and a couple dozen games.
But would I pay for youtube? That piece of shit? No. My life wouldn't be different if youtube were to disappear.
Because really, that's what this boils down to - bureaucrats circle jerking to the "oh look at how great we are now with this latest shiny project." Never mind that it violates people's privacy on a wholesale basis.
Why should I pay cable companies for a badly compressed copy when I can get it over the air with that $40 antenna I bought 15 years ago?
It't not like there's all that much worth watching on TV anyway - my dogs watch more TV in a day than I do in a month.
A good operative will not only be supplying info on who's doing what, but also on local sentiments, trends, etc. This can be valuable when deciding where to look, what policies are working and what are backfiring, etc.
No is too mild a word.
I have better things to do with my time ... erm ... like post on slashdot.
Seriously, never, no, nada, nein, nyet, or as we say in Soviet Kanuckistan, "No fucking way, eh!"
Not everything can be monetized - and not everything that you can extract a revenue stream from will generate a profit. "First we get the eyeballs, then we figure out how to make money from it" is dead, Jim.
Familiarity breeds contempt. Not only would the questionable perk of viewing porn and other amusing things become boring after constant exposure,
Kind of makes you want to feel sorry for gynecologists ...
True, but this doesn't sound like it needs that much skill to do it. Also can't this sort of thing be automated?
They tried that, but the computer grokked some robot hentai porn and went into an infinite loop, with the dvd drive just sliding in and out and in and out and in and out ...
Ya know facebook pretends to care about privacy all that but how can they keep that up
That *could* be a problem after watching pr0n all day ... maybe they could click on some of those contextual ads for some V14GR4 ...
Why is Joe allowed to choose his food then ?
So you should be allowed to choose milk laced with melamine? Meat with salmonella? Rancid Starkist tuna?
The tainted Star-Kist tuna scandal
Broadcast Date: Sept. 17, 1985
What became known as "Tunagate" erupts after this Fifth Estate report airs on Sept. 17, 1985. The CBC's Eric Malling reveals that Progressive Conservative Fisheries Minister John Fraser had knowingly approved a million cans of rancid Star-Kist tuna for sale. Fraser ignored numerous reports declaring that the tuna with the "powerful smell" was unfit for human consumption. Star-Kist Canada Inc. and New Brunswick Premier Richard Hatfield were pressuring Fraser in order to protect the 400 jobs at the St. Andrew's, N.B., plant.
Before Tunagate, Star-Kist, the largest employer in New Brunswick's Charlotte County, had enjoyed a 39 per cent market share. But that share collapsed to near zero following the scandal. The company eventually pulled out of Canada and the 400 employees at the St. Andrew's, N.B., plant lost their jobs.
Just when and how much Prime Minister Brian Mulroney knew about the events leading up to Tunagate was never made clear. Mulroney initially said he knew about the decision to sell the tainted tuna but later recanted, saying he only learned about the affair when the CBC's The Fifth Estate story aired. Mulroney was also accused by the Opposition of not telling the whole truth when he told the New York Times he had fired Fraser as soon as he had heard of the affair. In fact, it had taken six days.
Weeks after the Tunagate scandal broke, baseball fans booed Mulroney during the opening game of the American League championship playoffs in Toronto by chanting: "Tuna! Tuna! Tuna!"
No, publishers should and do exercise editorial and quality controls over the content that they publish. CNN is a publisher. If I write a news article, should I be able to get it published as news if I pay them enough money?
Never happen. Fox would sue them for infringement of their business methods.
But you're right - the publisher hires the editor(s), contracts with printers and distributors, etc.
That would be like suing HP for selling the Laserjets that were used to print it.
Nope - the publisher actually gets to see the content before publishing it. What if they put out a magazine full of kiddie porn? Could they claim "we only publish it?" Didn't think so.
You're confusing the publisher with the printer. The publisher is responsible for hiring the editors (you know, the people who are supposed to be reviewing what's published - unless it's slashdot), etc., and will contract with a printing company for the actual print run.
Haven't you ever seen "How to Get Ahead in Advertising?" Placebos are for beginners. The real experts first make you actually suffer a problem (ostensibly self-induced), then they start selling you the cure.
Like the fich company that, for some reason, their salmon was white instead of pink, so they advertised it as "guaranteed not to turn pink in the can."
A true claim, but still unethical.
Or cigarette manufacturers early claims that smoking would help you lose weight - how much does a lung weigh?
How do I apply and am I allowed to save the images to my computer?
Neither your hard drive, nor your [censored}, are big enough.
They don't want people who will end up filing for workers' comp for "tennis elbow".
Excellent summary of the situation, but you can be sure that someone is going to view it as unpatriotic to even suggest that foreign policy is fatally flawed - "we can't afford to look weak" or some such nonsense. Only the weak and the bullies can't afford to look weak.
You can't appeal to someone's idealism if you yourself are perceived as something less than an "honest broker."
Eve better is that it's more energy efficient, has its' own built-in UPS, is quiet, and you can plug in an external keyboard and mouse (either into the laptop or the monitor) and hide the laptop (or duct-tape it to the back of the lcd screen - sort of like a poor man's iMac.
Most newer laptops have a connection for both an external monitor and an s-video out. For less than the cost of a new laptop display, you can get a much bigger desktop screen.
No, but it means spending on people in the field, rather than generating big hi-tech budgets with cool buzz-words, and your own personal fiefdom. Security takes second seat to "oh, shiny." Always has (just look at car designers resistance to incorporating safety features).
"Aim that at me and I'll kill you." -- Jame Retief, "Retief's War"
That has GOT to be one of the best multi-book characters in Sci-Fi. Sure, the stories are a bit pulpy (okay, they're a LOT pulpy, and quite camp), but they're fun "Pulp (sci)-Fiction."
If you see the stories, it's all about "Android" cell phones. Google, and now their partners, went out of their way to raise the public profile of the operating system. eg: "Motorola to introduce Android cell phones."
Why not spike it with booze instead. "Every hour is happy hour!"
And when people then still continue to "off" themselves, we can say "no big deal, it was just another drunk."
So, can I have my research grant now?
... that the name "Android" really sucks for a cell phone.
Let's take an example of how it was done right - the Motorola Razr - "as thin as a razor."
But then again, this is from a company (Google) that couldn't even spell their OWN name right.
Google - accidental misspelling of googol. According to Google's vice president, as quoted on a BBC The Money Programme documentary, January 2006, the founders - noted for their poor spelling - registered Google as a trademark and web address before someone pointed out that it was not correct.
Hey, maybe they should have mis-spelled it as "Andruid" - they could have had a tie-in with the Boston Celtics. Or "Endroid" and hooked up with Preparation H. ("Shitty cell phone service? Use Endroid"). Or A-roid - the "Cell phone on steroids".
might be a good idea, epidemiologically speaking, to catch the flu now vs. later.
That's silly: why would the solution to eradicating a disease be catching it when it's already out there?
The real problem, which the original poster failed to note, is that the reason why catching the flu one year gives only a limited window of immunity (1 to 3 years) is because after a few years, the flue virus has mutated enough so that the body's immune system doesn't recognize it.
Better to just wash your hands, teach little kids (and adults at stop lights*) not to pick their boogers and wipe it on the walls, don't share mice, keyboards, or phones, etc.
*- I don't know how many times I've pulled up to a light and the person in the next car has a finger jammed up their nose. They probably also do this wile driving down the road. There's got to be some people who have had accidents because of this - so when their air bag goes off, does it jam their finger up into their brain?).
You're not gonna kill him, according to the maker of the item, no matter what
10% of all tasers tested in this study were found to be defective.
And taser, despite what they want to say, has now entered the language as a generic term. It's used not just as a product name, but as a verb ("I will tase you. bro!").