A public terminal to do online banking? Sounds like any ATM machine to me, as all those devices are more of less online these days. Lo and behold, they even handle cash.
Frankly, I'd be more concerned with the fact that it's just too easy to take a sneak peek at my VISA card number.
But I think a chunkload of built-in flash-memory wouldn't be such a bad idea Ideal for storing documents, MP3 files, whatnot. I might want to use the SD slot for other purposes.
Btw: How the hell was my post modded insghtful, when what I did was wearing my ignorande on my sleeve? (asking fellow/. questions)
Oh yes. Meditation is a good tool to relieve stress, anxiety, exhaustion and annoyance in the workplace.
But hey, in a good workplace there shouldn't be a reason for stress, anxiety, exhaustion and annoyance. If yoga is needed to feel good, something else is wrong.
"As previously reported, the T2 comes with 32MB of memory"
How come those devices always are so cheap on internal memory? I mean, get a least 128 MB in the cheapest of MP3 players these days. So what's the problem?
Not quite so. Many of those spams I get that are trying to con me of my hard earned cash don't provide more than a web page link or an nondescript reply to adress. This is probably to avoid all those ppl that would flood them with return spam and generally angry replies. It often takes a few clicks to get down to the actual real contact info.
When the media talks about "theft" in the context of file-sharing, everyone knows they're talking about the mass copyright-infringement of media that happens on p2p networks.
We know, but far from everyone, belive me. Let's just hope a judge and jury knows, and can take the accusors by the ear if they start treading that line in court...
headline - RIAA sues the file-sharers slashdot - that's bullshit, they should uh.. uh.. uh.. stop using the term "theft"! why do they keep getting it wrong? assholes!
I for one salute the RIAA for finally getting the point. The only ones that are legally responsible for publishing copyrighted work are the one who publishes it: The individual who put the songs up for grabs.
Now, the problem with all this is that as long as RIAA claims that it is theft we're talking about, they make the offense seem like a much more serious crime than it is.
To share a bunch of MP3 songs for downloading may be illegal. So is jaywalking on an empty street at 3 in the morning. In some countries (dunno about USA) you are actually not allowed to play a cd in public, due to copyright restrictions. Noone gives a shit. And having songs shared on Kazaa should not be treated as a more serious infrigement than that.
A filesharer has not the intent to inflict harm, niether physically or economically, and niether does he do it for his own profít. It is not proved in a court of law or through independent investigation that filesharing hurts anyones business.
We still have to see what a settlement in a P2P-users case will look like, and what amounts we're talking about. If sharing...say...50 tunes costs you more than a regular parking ticket, the words "travesty of justice" would come to mind.
Various friends in bands I know are about to or have spent between $20,000 and $30,000 JUST to record the album....
Of course, I know people who've done the same thing and spent under $5k on recording. And the records don't sound quite so good.
On the other hand, I know pepole who've done the same thing and spent just over $3k on recording. And belive me, it sounds just as good as anything you can pick up in your local cd store.
Specified, that was $1000 for a few days in a perfecly good studio (although a bit run down), $1500 for their studio software and a PC. Finally $700 paid to a professional mastering enginneer for the final touch.
With the right know-how, talent and most of all patience the cost for a professional sound does not have to skyrocket.
NPersonally, I can't even begin to imagine how I should do to burn 30000 dollars on recording an album, unless I had to hire a symphonic orchestra.
Yeah, but about a thousand albums/year ain't impossible, provided the band is good enough, and knows how to market themselves at gigs, fanzines, on the web etc.
One thousand 12 track albums sold = 12000 tunes.
12000 tunes * $0.59 = $7080 (Is't there some kind of Full Album discount at iTunes?)
Not enough to quit the day job, but it would pay an amp or two, plus plenty of time in a studio.
This could probably be made with more affordable hardware, like a TFT touch screen, or even a regular monitor and an XY pad. It would take a slight adjustment of the original constuction, interface-wise. But the main idea would still be applicable.
The really low budget version of this would be a software-only product controlled by mouse. It would probably sell, even though some functionality would probably be lost.
Really, is this anything else than your regular loop arranging sofrware (read E-jay, MMM...) but with a different interface? A cool interface, I guess, and it does open up some interresting performance possibilities.
But is it useful for other kinds of creation than synching timetretched chunks, predetermined snippets and drumloops? It seems I wouldn't have any control over the details of the music.
You are right about one thing. The 10 to 15 tracks that makes an album today is based on a technical limitation in the media.
But, bear in mind that the most common length of a single pop or rock song is a part ofa tradition that also has it's roots in technical limitation. 3 to 5 minutes was good for an old single back in the days before LP albums even.
An album today is often more than some hits and a bunch of fillers. For many artists it is a linked collection of music that should be enjoyed in a context, like the chapters of a book or a series of similar paintings. Some of my favourite tunes are songs that have grown on me for a very long time, songs that I first considered "fillers" too.
Now, with a freer media, like MP3, the exact length of an album should be freer than before. To make a song collection of 5 or 25 songs should be equally OK, as long as they are priced accordingly.
So, how does one sell those MP3-albums online? The answer is Packaging and Pricing.
* If a single file of 5 minutes costs $1 (a fair price IMO), an album of 10 such tracks should cost something like $8.
* Include goodies with the album purchase that the single track buyers don't get. Extra artwork, notes from the artist about the tracks and the album, uncompressed WAV or FLAC for the audiophiles, access to a web page with VIP forum, downloadable demo versions and promotional videos, a complimentary blowjob, what do I know?
* A fast one click download for the whole package.
Information is about as living and animated as a brick. It doesn't want shiat.
However I do think that the author of the information should get their share if their work is publiched. Or rather, if someone makes money off publishing their work. Non profit fan sites with the occational songtext, who cares? But a website with an economy (even if it's just a few banner ads) should pay up.
A PlexWriter cd-rw and Exact Audio Copy v0.9 did the trick for me. Pop in the disc, and when it flunks, choose Detect TOC Manually. Rip and live happily ever after.
You'll get a short clip (1/10 of a sec) of silence 10 seconds into the beginning of each song though, But personally I can live with that.
Those music disks are not 'copy protected', they are 'playback crippled'.
The best (or worst, depending of if you are an exec of a user) the record companies can do is to make their products a little bit more inconvenient to make copies of. They do this by making it more difficult (but never ever impossible) or time consuming to make copies. That is all.
To call it 'protection' is like wrapping your wiener in toilet paper and calling it a condom. It's stupid, it doesn't get yhe job done and it's only uncomfy. (I think, haven't tried it.)
As already replied, that is not the rock that hit the car. It was alot bigger.
The damage on the car seems to be about right for a 10 kg rock traveling at terminal velocity. And thats what happened. Any stone that isnt too big will eventually slow down in the athmosphere. And that isnt all that damn fast.
So no, the small pebble that hit the girl would not had trashed her foot totally. If it fell from space or from an airplane or a tall building (or shot from a smokestack) it would still have about the same speed when it hit her. Were she barefoot it might break a bone or two, but just as likely not.
And if she wore good boots it would indeed had just bounced off.
Slashdot Mirror
A public terminal to do online banking? Sounds like any ATM machine to me, as all those devices are more of less online these days. Lo and behold, they even handle cash.
Frankly, I'd be more concerned with the fact that it's just too easy to take a sneak peek at my VISA card number.
And thus, I am enlightened. Thanks.
/. questions)
But I think a chunkload of built-in flash-memory wouldn't be such a bad idea Ideal for storing documents, MP3 files, whatnot. I might want to use the SD slot for other purposes.
Btw: How the hell was my post modded insghtful, when what I did was wearing my ignorande on my sleeve? (asking fellow
Oh yes. Meditation is a good tool to relieve stress, anxiety, exhaustion and annoyance in the workplace.
But hey, in a good workplace there shouldn't be a reason for stress, anxiety, exhaustion and annoyance. If yoga is needed to feel good, something else is wrong.
"As previously reported, the T2 comes with 32MB of memory"
How come those devices always are so cheap on internal memory? I mean, get a least 128 MB in the cheapest of MP3 players these days. So what's the problem?
Not quite so. Many of those spams I get that are trying to con me of my hard earned cash don't provide more than a web page link or an nondescript reply to adress. This is probably to avoid all those ppl that would flood them with return spam and generally angry replies. It often takes a few clicks to get down to the actual real contact info.
...and cue the In Soviet Russia jokes...
First of all. A spam message with real, working means of contacting the sender? Why din't I ever get that? Only in Russia, I say.
And second, that guy is hereby my god.
When the media talks about "theft" in the context of file-sharing, everyone knows they're talking about the mass copyright-infringement of media that happens on p2p networks.
We know, but far from everyone, belive me. Let's just hope a judge and jury knows, and can take the accusors by the ear if they start treading that line in court...
headline - RIAA sues the file-sharers
slashdot - that's bullshit, they should uh.. uh.. uh.. stop using the term "theft"! why do they keep getting it wrong? assholes!
I for one salute the RIAA for finally getting the point. The only ones that are legally responsible for publishing copyrighted work are the one who publishes it: The individual who put the songs up for grabs.
Now, the problem with all this is that as long as RIAA claims that it is theft we're talking about, they make the offense seem like a much more serious crime than it is.
To share a bunch of MP3 songs for downloading may be illegal. So is jaywalking on an empty street at 3 in the morning. In some countries (dunno about USA) you are actually not allowed to play a cd in public, due to copyright restrictions. Noone gives a shit. And having songs shared on Kazaa should not be treated as a more serious infrigement than that.
A filesharer has not the intent to inflict harm, niether physically or economically, and niether does he do it for his own profít. It is not proved in a court of law or through independent investigation that filesharing hurts anyones business.
We still have to see what a settlement in a P2P-users case will look like, and what amounts we're talking about. If sharing...say...50 tunes costs you more than a regular parking ticket, the words "travesty of justice" would come to mind.
Various friends in bands I know are about to or have spent between $20,000 and $30,000 JUST to record the album. ...
Of course, I know people who've done the same thing and spent under $5k on recording. And the records don't sound quite so good.
On the other hand, I know pepole who've done the same thing and spent just over $3k on recording. And belive me, it sounds just as good as anything you can pick up in your local cd store.
Specified, that was $1000 for a few days in a perfecly good studio (although a bit run down), $1500 for their studio software and a PC. Finally $700 paid to a professional mastering enginneer for the final touch.
With the right know-how, talent and most of all patience the cost for a professional sound does not have to skyrocket.
NPersonally, I can't even begin to imagine how I should do to burn 30000 dollars on recording an album, unless I had to hire a symphonic orchestra.
Please enlighten me.
Yeah, but about a thousand albums/year ain't impossible, provided the band is good enough, and knows how to market themselves at gigs, fanzines, on the web etc.
One thousand 12 track albums sold = 12000 tunes.
12000 tunes * $0.59 = $7080
(Is't there some kind of Full Album discount at iTunes?)
Not enough to quit the day job, but it would pay an amp or two, plus plenty of time in a studio.
This could probably be made with more affordable hardware, like a TFT touch screen, or even a regular monitor and an XY pad. It would take a slight adjustment of the original constuction, interface-wise. But the main idea would still be applicable.
The really low budget version of this would be a software-only product controlled by mouse. It would probably sell, even though some functionality would probably be lost.
Really, is this anything else than your regular loop arranging sofrware (read E-jay, MMM...) but with a different interface? A cool interface, I guess, and it does open up some interresting performance possibilities.
But is it useful for other kinds of creation than synching timetretched chunks, predetermined snippets and drumloops? It seems I wouldn't have any control over the details of the music.
But can I play Chopsticks on it?
IMO, it's not about fillers.
You are right about one thing. The 10 to 15 tracks that makes an album today is based on a technical limitation in the media.
But, bear in mind that the most common length of a single pop or rock song is a part ofa tradition that also has it's roots in technical limitation. 3 to 5 minutes was good for an old single back in the days before LP albums even.
An album today is often more than some hits and a bunch of fillers. For many artists it is a linked collection of music that should be enjoyed in a context, like the chapters of a book or a series of similar paintings. Some of my favourite tunes are songs that have grown on me for a very long time, songs that I first considered "fillers" too.
Now, with a freer media, like MP3, the exact length of an album should be freer than before. To make a song collection of 5 or 25 songs should be equally OK, as long as they are priced accordingly.
So, how does one sell those MP3-albums online? The answer is Packaging and Pricing.
* If a single file of 5 minutes costs $1 (a fair price IMO), an album of 10 such tracks should cost something like $8.
* Include goodies with the album purchase that the single track buyers don't get. Extra artwork, notes from the artist about the tracks and the album, uncompressed WAV or FLAC for the audiophiles, access to a web page with VIP forum, downloadable demo versions and promotional videos, a complimentary blowjob, what do I know?
* A fast one click download for the whole package.
I'd sure pull out the VISA.
Papier Mache Balrog.
I think I'll pass.
Oh brother. I just love that dogma. :)
Information is about as living and animated as a brick. It doesn't want shiat.
However I do think that the author of the information should get their share if their work is publiched. Or rather, if someone makes money off publishing their work. Non profit fan sites with the occational songtext, who cares? But a website with an economy (even if it's just a few banner ads) should pay up.
A PlexWriter cd-rw and Exact Audio Copy v0.9 did the trick for me. Pop in the disc, and when it flunks, choose Detect TOC Manually. Rip and live happily ever after.
You'll get a short clip (1/10 of a sec) of silence 10 seconds into the beginning of each song though, But personally I can live with that.
Those music disks are not 'copy protected', they are 'playback crippled'.
The best (or worst, depending of if you are an exec of a user) the record companies can do is to make their products a little bit more inconvenient to make copies of. They do this by making it more difficult (but never ever impossible) or time consuming to make copies. That is all.
To call it 'protection' is like wrapping your wiener in toilet paper and calling it a condom. It's stupid, it doesn't get yhe job done and it's only uncomfy. (I think, haven't tried it.)
Ahem...
Dammit. Make the moille screens decent first.
...sounds like my neighbours.
As already replied, that is not the rock that hit the car. It was alot bigger.
The damage on the car seems to be about right for a 10 kg rock traveling at terminal velocity. And thats what happened. Any stone that isnt too big will eventually slow down in the athmosphere. And that isnt all that damn fast.
So no, the small pebble that hit the girl would not had trashed her foot totally. If it fell from space or from an airplane or a tall building (or shot from a smokestack) it would still have about the same speed when it hit her. Were she barefoot it might break a bone or two, but just as likely not.
And if she wore good boots it would indeed had just bounced off.
Yeah, like this one. What a dog.
Get a grip.
Would this mean that Id have to wait 2 minutes befort I can actually drive the damn thing every time I start?
:)
Inane, but valid question.
'A mouse can be just as dangerous as a bullet or a bomb.'
Uh, isnt most hacking done on keyboards?