I suspect that after a few rentals most people would decide that they want one of their own, so I doubt there's much of a long-term market for this.
Now this is the part why I can understand a place like Ritz doing this, but not Walgreens. You drop off the camera and are waiting around for the pics to be "developed" and there's a nice little counter top full of digital cameras for you to look at.
Generate interest, get customer return, and have customer with idle time looking at your product. Sounds like a good marketing strategy to me.
Let's see, there's the mandatory 14 day waiting period. Additionally most states require you to have a concealed carry permit unless it's a target pistol. In CT to get a permit you need a town permit (which requires character witnesses, completed gun safety course, and background check) and THEN you can get a state permit.
The point here isn't which is more deadly, the point is that there is already more than sufficient regulation on firearms. Why should this tool get more regulation than any other that is deadly when misused?
My point was very simple. You seem to be absolutely obsessing over guns and the rights and responsibilities for using them. The fact is that guns are already heavily regulated. Whether states and the federal government care to enforce the existing regulations is usually the more important issue.
As to your second question the sole pupose of a gun isn't to hurt other people. A gun is a tool. Pure and simple. You can use that tool to 1) shoot at targets 2) shoot at animals 3) shoot at people trying to kill/harm you or your family 4) shoot at evil dictators who are reponsible for raping and killing hundreds of thousands of people
What exactly is it that is so offensive to you about a gun?
...to release and distribute the software under the provisions of the GPL.
The GPL very clearly states that if code cannot be freely redistributed then it cannot be distributed at all. SCO has explicitely stated that they have valid copyright claims over the Linux kernel and intend to exercise them. The minute they make a statement like that then the GPL is invalid according to them and they lose the right to distribute.
However, they CONTINUE to distribute to this day. (And have even recently updated their distribution of the kernel).
Next thing you're going to say is that technically the Internet is a P2P network, since all of the OSI layers except for Application are the same. So now "uploading" "copyrighted" "files" to the "Internet" is a "crime."
Now let me see if I understand this whole P2P thing.
The idea is that you have a file on your computer and you share out access to that file. A client then comes along and downloads/transfers that file to their computer.
When exactly are you "uploading a file" in this process?
(In the traditional sense an upload usually signifies a push process.)
What Linus was saying about patents was that he will not actively go and search out patents to see if a development is infringing. This is considered the proper practice for engineers as it would eliminate any possible clean-room development defense if they looked at the patents, AND (to make matters worse) patents are so horribly written that you may not even recognize an infringing item.
As for the RCU, he was extra careful because it was a known fact that IBM had a patent related to the code in question. So, he was being careful to make IBM formally license the patent before including the code.
You'll need to build up a pretty good website in order to do this and probably some major bandwidth as well. (At least make sure you host somewhere where you can scale it up well.)
Give aways - Bit Torrents of 64 KB MP3's. The lower quality ones and maybe 25% - 50% of the tracks you're offerring. Since this would be a relatively unknown you're going to have to generate some buzz and the best way to do that is let some of these MP3's get onto Kazaa, etc.
Sell - High quality MP3's and full CD's. Sell the 192 KB VBR versions of ALL the MP3's and ask people to not share them around. Offer the art and lyrics if they download an entire CD (with maybe a lower price than the per-track cost to boot). Additionally, since not everyone is blessed with broadband you should sell actual CD's. Press new ones once a week based on sales and that shouldn't take up too much time. (Buy one of those CD robotic recorders with label printer gizmos).
Build community - Go donwload slashcode or something like that. Have discussion areas for the albums and artists. Offer streams of concerts. Anything you can think of to further push the buzz.
(films above 2.5 hours are not good financially as they reduce the number of performances per day and hence the number of bums on seats of paying customers)
Frankly I'd be worried if there was an excess number of bums on the seat of ANY paying customer...:-}
What I really want to see is for all of the copyright infringement to stop on P2P networks for one month.
Why? So that we can see P2P traffic drop way down (it can still be used to share the "legal" stuff) and record sales to remain flat.
As long as the RIAA member companies can keep pointing at the P2P sites and say "this is why our sales suck" they'll get away with it. If we break their fictitious chain of cause and effect then they're going to have to step up and realize that they've got some serious problems. (Or at least their stock holders will realize it.)
So, c'mon folks. Do without your music fixes for awhile. Heck, just take some time to listen to what you've already d/l'ed. and leave it at that.
As long as P2P traffic is high then "voting with your wallet" can't make a statement.
Frankly you can only spend so long designing a program the first time around. This is especially true if you're building it for a customer as they never really know what they actually want to begin with.
So, you slap something together and you show it to them and say, "So is this what you were thinking about?" Usually they'll say, almost, but I want this different, and what about this feature, and why is that button over there...so on and so forth.
Frankly I believe we used to call this prototyping. Now, in the real world it is easy to see that a prototype is a jury-rigged thing that will fall apart if you push it too hard. In the computer-world if the GUI looks polished than the program must obviously be done.:-}
This is probably responsible for more things remaining Q&D than anything else. (Though some blame belongs with us programmers who don't always like doing the cleaning up work.)
Maybe we need the graphical equivalent of duct tape on the prototype's GUI so people realize that it IS in fact a prototype.:-D
Slashdot Mirror
"Which port is it that you need to block?"
:-D
To make windows secure?
All of them.
You only have to block the port where the power cord goes into the computer.
I suspect that after a few rentals most people would decide that they want one of their own, so I doubt there's much of a long-term market for this.
Now this is the part why I can understand a place like Ritz doing this, but not Walgreens. You drop off the camera and are waiting around for the pics to be "developed" and there's a nice little counter top full of digital cameras for you to look at.
Generate interest, get customer return, and have customer with idle time looking at your product. Sounds like a good marketing strategy to me.
for servicing an iLoo! :-D (Just don't ask what the S in BSOD for that one stands for...)
We're talking about handguns here now.
Let's see, there's the mandatory 14 day waiting period. Additionally most states require you to have a concealed carry permit unless it's a target pistol. In CT to get a permit you need a town permit (which requires character witnesses, completed gun safety course, and background check) and THEN you can get a state permit.
The point here isn't which is more deadly, the point is that there is already more than sufficient regulation on firearms. Why should this tool get more regulation than any other that is deadly when misused?
Reducto ad absurdum does NOT an argument make.
My point was very simple. You seem to be absolutely obsessing over guns and the rights and responsibilities for using them. The fact is that guns are already heavily regulated. Whether states and the federal government care to enforce the existing regulations is usually the more important issue.
As to your second question the sole pupose of a gun isn't to hurt other people. A gun is a tool. Pure and simple. You can use that tool to
1) shoot at targets
2) shoot at animals
3) shoot at people trying to kill/harm you or your family
4) shoot at evil dictators who are reponsible for raping and killing hundreds of thousands of people
What exactly is it that is so offensive to you about a gun?
She shouldn't be fined for pirating music. She should be fined for her taste in music.
:-D )
The problem was, after looking at the list of songs they were unable to identify any actual taste or even discernment being exercised.
(Personally I think Pate's daughter is angling for an insanity defense.
What about knives? How about propane tanks? (Those have been used to kill or attempt to kill people in schools.)
I think you're getting a little to far ahead of yourself and concentrating on responsiblities for only a single thing.
...to release and distribute the software under the provisions of the GPL.
e rv er/current/SRPMS
The GPL very clearly states that if code cannot be freely redistributed then it cannot be distributed at all. SCO has explicitely stated that they have valid copyright claims over the Linux kernel and intend to exercise them. The minute they make a statement like that then the GPL is invalid according to them and they lose the right to distribute.
However, they CONTINUE to distribute to this day. (And have even recently updated their distribution of the kernel).
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/S
linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm 5/9/2003 5:51:00 PM
(Emphasis added)
This is the part where it gets really messy.
SCO cannot sell a license that would make your Linux install "legal".
You see, if you need a license to run the SCO code then you lose the license to run the rest of the Linux code. Go read your GPL.
Apparently you could actually make some money (read "intern") for the previous president and still get in some "face time". :-}
Next thing you're going to say is that technically the Internet is a P2P network, since all of the OSI layers except for Application are the same. So now "uploading" "copyrighted" "files" to the "Internet" is a "crime."
:-D
Wow, we could shut down PressPlay.
Now let me see if I understand this whole P2P thing.
The idea is that you have a file on your computer and you share out access to that file. A client then comes along and downloads/transfers that file to their computer.
When exactly are you "uploading a file" in this process?
(In the traditional sense an upload usually signifies a push process.)
Remember: The old adage "fight fire with fire" does not apply to non-metaphorical fires.
Actually, back-burns are a classic way of fighting forrest fires. The idea is to deprive the larger fire of the fuel it needs to continue spreading.
If we had only been running Find Fast in Iraq then locating Saddam et. al. would have been so much easier...
(Of course we'd also have had all our tanks disabled by the I Love You virus...)
I hear the Coast Guard is trying to get an exemption from having to use Windows.
:-D
Too many open ports.
What Linus was saying about patents was that he will not actively go and search out patents to see if a development is infringing. This is considered the proper practice for engineers as it would eliminate any possible clean-room development defense if they looked at the patents, AND (to make matters worse) patents are so horribly written that you may not even recognize an infringing item.
As for the RCU, he was extra careful because it was a known fact that IBM had a patent related to the code in question. So, he was being careful to make IBM formally license the patent before including the code.
You'll need to build up a pretty good website in order to do this and probably some major bandwidth as well. (At least make sure you host somewhere where you can scale it up well.)
Give aways - Bit Torrents of 64 KB MP3's. The lower quality ones and maybe 25% - 50% of the tracks you're offerring. Since this would be a relatively unknown you're going to have to generate some buzz and the best way to do that is let some of these MP3's get onto Kazaa, etc.
Sell - High quality MP3's and full CD's. Sell the 192 KB VBR versions of ALL the MP3's and ask people to not share them around. Offer the art and lyrics if they download an entire CD (with maybe a lower price than the per-track cost to boot). Additionally, since not everyone is blessed with broadband you should sell actual CD's. Press new ones once a week based on sales and that shouldn't take up too much time. (Buy one of those CD robotic recorders with label printer gizmos).
Build community - Go donwload slashcode or something like that. Have discussion areas for the albums and artists. Offer streams of concerts. Anything you can think of to further push the buzz.
(films above 2.5 hours are not good financially as they reduce the number of performances per day and hence the number of bums on seats of paying customers)
:-}
Frankly I'd be worried if there was an excess number of bums on the seat of ANY paying customer...
What I really want to see is for all of the copyright infringement to stop on P2P networks for one month.
Why? So that we can see P2P traffic drop way down (it can still be used to share the "legal" stuff) and record sales to remain flat.
As long as the RIAA member companies can keep pointing at the P2P sites and say "this is why our sales suck" they'll get away with it. If we break their fictitious chain of cause and effect then they're going to have to step up and realize that they've got some serious problems. (Or at least their stock holders will realize it.)
So, c'mon folks. Do without your music fixes for awhile. Heck, just take some time to listen to what you've already d/l'ed. and leave it at that.
As long as P2P traffic is high then "voting with your wallet" can't make a statement.
You're gonna get tooled on big time. :-D
Divorce may tame bank accounts. :-}
...that Unix WAS mispelled. :-}
This is why I feel real hackers should be castrated to avoid them. There is historical precedent (i.e. the operatic castrato).
Yes sir we've got trouble, ....DANCING!
right here in Indiani City,
With a capital T that rhymes with D
and that stands for...
Life immitates art far too often.
Frankly you can only spend so long designing a program the first time around. This is especially true if you're building it for a customer as they never really know what they actually want to begin with.
:-}
:-D
So, you slap something together and you show it to them and say, "So is this what you were thinking about?" Usually they'll say, almost, but I want this different, and what about this feature, and why is that button over there...so on and so forth.
Frankly I believe we used to call this prototyping. Now, in the real world it is easy to see that a prototype is a jury-rigged thing that will fall apart if you push it too hard. In the computer-world if the GUI looks polished than the program must obviously be done.
This is probably responsible for more things remaining Q&D than anything else. (Though some blame belongs with us programmers who don't always like doing the cleaning up work.)
Maybe we need the graphical equivalent of duct tape on the prototype's GUI so people realize that it IS in fact a prototype.
They're hoping that this Mozilla creature can do something about their bi-annual Godzilla invasions.