Then, market CDs as gifts...nothing says "I love you" like a new original CD, instead of a home-burned one with a Sharpie-scrawl label. They could even go for the Hallmark market share, or perhaps go into Valentine's candy boxes with a CD inside, surrounded by chocolate. Employees can be rewarded not with a simple "You're #1!" keyring, but a "You're #1!" keyring which is also a mini-CD single with their favorite song!
"Say it with a CD," that's the ticket. Just watch out for proper etiquette: an "I'm sorry honey" CD-bouquet should not include the song "Oops! I Did It Again."
Uh, I'm just saying that the Apollo equipment is the pinnacle of space technology, and that was a long time ago. Right now we have a lot of dreaming from NASA, but not much doing.
The Saturn is not dumb, and it did an exceptional job. It just should have been a tool that helped develop a better way of doing its job. The moon would be an excellent low-gravity launch platform, especially for using some of the dirtier nuclear propulsion methods in development.
So, we still do things the way they were done 40 years ago. I refuse to believe that the best way to get into space is to fill a monstrous tube with combustibles and light it all up, just to get a few tons of gear in orbit. Before serious interplanetary exploration, we should establish a good moon base, and do vehicle construction and launches from there.
Well, she's a 12-year-old girl living in the projects, but with broadband access and a parent who obviously think paying Kazaa 30 bucks is a worthy investment.
I think her mother is probably the real culprit here, she's using her daughter as a shield. And the press is eating it up like candy.
Seriously, people, what do you expect? You yell and scream about how much you hate the record labels and the RIAA, yet you scramble over yourselves to get their latest product, legally or otherwise. Totally the wrong signal, if you really want the RIAA to change its ways.
Either buy their CDs, or drop it. Don't share their crap, if you really believe that it is. Stop being hypocrites. All the RIAA can see on the P2P networks is proof of the popularity of their products, and until that changes, the RIAA never will.
Walk away from the conference table for a few seconds, when you come back there are no doughnuts left! Just a laptop and cell phone sitting there innocently. They'll never tell....
"Sir, it appears to be a second-class hiring anomaly. They are pointing fingers, I suggest evasive action. Our treasury is not capable of withstanding a direct attack."
"Understood. It appears that...we can...not win this...one. Change our course to...braised shrimp and roast duck. Maximum warp!"
Don't know if I've ever tried it before, but hey, SCO: pure comedy gold! The cliche that never grows old! (whoa that rhymes...ok it's time for coffee now.)
Or......infrasound is how the ghosts are trying to communicate with us! All we have to do is record it and then speed up the tape! Maybe play it backwards too? You'd probably hear "Iiiii...am the ghost of Caldera.....bring me $699 or I shall not find eternal peeeaaaaace....."
Does anyone get the idea that essentially the RIAA would be happiest if the Internet did not exist, period? After all, their business model is based on passive entertainment mediums such as television and radio, and physical media distribution. The Internet gives people too much choice as to what they want to see.
For that matter, the Internet can be less offensive than TV or radio! I know a lot of parents who are horrified at the things children can see on today's media, and at least with the Internet the parents can have some small measure of control over what comes into their child's view.
Child pornography, phhft. It's pretty hypocritical, when the media exploitation of the newest underage pop star is verging on just that.
Sysadmin: "HA! I have patched all my software, yelled at all the users with weak passwords, locked down every possible port and continously monitor the allowed ones, and with this keystroke I will enable UNBREAKABLE encryption on every critical data file!"
Maybe, at least until the "1-Terabyte hack" comes out for this.
Sheesh. Even the low-end model is ridiculous. I cannot imagine anyone needing a PVR of more than eight hours capacity. If you need to save weeks of continuous TV, then you watch TV an awful lot. When are you going to find time to watch two weeks of saved TV, while you are so busy watching your live TV? I have this mental image of a hard-core TV watcher, sitting in front of a video wall tuned to 30 different channels in a room knee-deep in empty Funyuns bags.
What he's saying is that, yes, he can get cable broadband, but he's not down with The Man and the Corporations. Oh well.
My definition of broadband is "vastly improved over modem speeds," not "vastly improved over modem speeds and the CEO is not money-hungry." If that were the case, nobody has broadband.
I'm not sure what brings you to that conclusion, but whatever. I pays my money, I gets my bandwidth, I'm not in a contract so I can dump them at any time. The connection was off once, several months ago, for about 5 minutes. They haven't come and let the air out my car tires or anything, so I guess we're cool.
How's the latency on that wireless? I'd consider doing that if I lived closer to work, and if they had an OC-3....
Oh really? Because I am currently paying Time Warner for Roadrunner service alone, and no cable TV at all. Consistent 2Mbps, which works better for me than the shared T1's at work. I also use a cell phone instead of a land line (cell phone doubles as emergency portable internet connection, gets me about 100Kbits/s).
Honestly, the broadband sitution is not all that bad. You really can get broadband in nearly all semi-populated areas. Everyone whines that it's not everywhere, but this is a growing market...how long did it take before everyone had a telephone? And just recently, cell phone coverage (which is approaching ubiquitous at this point).
Hate to crush your fantasy, but it takes time to hook up wires, and it costs money to run them. It'll happen, and it's actually doing OK considering the massive land area we have to service in the U.S.
I found that I don't actually need music to get through my day. It can be a big distraction, especially if the object of the music is to garner as much attention for the artist as possible. Why buy it? It doesn't have any intrinsic value, just something that makes a box produce highly processed vibrations in the air.
A live performance is much better, because the artist is actually there and speaking to the audience through their music. It's the difference between a home-cooked meal and a squished, lukewarm McDonald's cheeseburger.
I've neither downloaded nor bought music for years. I don't want to drain my savings on the off chance I'd win the lawsuit lottery, and I don't want to pay the RIAA members any money to fund their racket.
They live in a dream world, thinking that all business problems can be solved by legal force. Bright idea! If they won't buy our stuff, let's sue them to get the money anyway! Whatever happened to studying the consumers and trying to develop a product they will buy?
The problem is this: they don't want to study the consumers. They want to control them. They are terrified that they are losing the ability to make and break artists, and define what is popular and what is not. Their whole business model revolves not around creating a quality product, but creating a slightly different product and brainwashing the consumers to buy it.
Do you honestly think anyone EVER seriously considered farming spiders for their silk? The idea of unimaginable numbers of spiders all together is chilling even to the bravest of us. And of course they'd discover that black widows or brown recluses or giant bird spiders produced the strongest silk, and then they would escape.... *shudder*
Imagine if Microsoft got their PVR rolling. Then they add a feature, say, when someone sends you an IM on the MSN network you can have a little notification or the actual message text scroll at the bottom of your TV screen. These are the kinds of things Microsoft has the ability to do, and the kinds of things it hopes will slowly pinch off the other IM networks until Microsoft can charge for IM services.
I don't see it happening, but at least some people will pay Microsoft for the priveledge.
Not sure why the parent post is marked Flamebait, I completely agree. The MSN client is so bloated that I won't use it.
What are IM systems for? Communication. There is no logic in restricting the end-user's choice of interface. You don't see telephone companies selling phones that won't work unless you call someone with another phone made by them, do you? If you want to control and profit from a service, you charge for the use of the communication channel and allow users to choose their interface.
That said, no one will use a pay IM service unless that's all there is. They're trying to force people to use their interface, then add so many features that everyone uses it and AIM/ICQ/Yahoo/Jabber die off...and then, open your checkbooks!
Slashdot Mirror
Hey mods...drink more coffee! I wasn't being serious. I guess dry American humor doesn't work...everyone thinks you really mean it.
You nailed it, this was supposed to be funny!
Just let people download all the music they want.
Then, market CDs as gifts...nothing says "I love you" like a new original CD, instead of a home-burned one with a Sharpie-scrawl label. They could even go for the Hallmark market share, or perhaps go into Valentine's candy boxes with a CD inside, surrounded by chocolate. Employees can be rewarded not with a simple "You're #1!" keyring, but a "You're #1!" keyring which is also a mini-CD single with their favorite song!
"Say it with a CD," that's the ticket. Just watch out for proper etiquette: an "I'm sorry honey" CD-bouquet should not include the song "Oops! I Did It Again."
Uh, I'm just saying that the Apollo equipment is the pinnacle of space technology, and that was a long time ago. Right now we have a lot of dreaming from NASA, but not much doing.
The Saturn is not dumb, and it did an exceptional job. It just should have been a tool that helped develop a better way of doing its job. The moon would be an excellent low-gravity launch platform, especially for using some of the dirtier nuclear propulsion methods in development.
So, we still do things the way they were done 40 years ago. I refuse to believe that the best way to get into space is to fill a monstrous tube with combustibles and light it all up, just to get a few tons of gear in orbit. Before serious interplanetary exploration, we should establish a good moon base, and do vehicle construction and launches from there.
Well, she's a 12-year-old girl living in the projects, but with broadband access and a parent who obviously think paying Kazaa 30 bucks is a worthy investment.
I think her mother is probably the real culprit here, she's using her daughter as a shield. And the press is eating it up like candy.
Seriously, people, what do you expect? You yell and scream about how much you hate the record labels and the RIAA, yet you scramble over yourselves to get their latest product, legally or otherwise. Totally the wrong signal, if you really want the RIAA to change its ways.
Either buy their CDs, or drop it. Don't share their crap, if you really believe that it is. Stop being hypocrites. All the RIAA can see on the P2P networks is proof of the popularity of their products, and until that changes, the RIAA never will.
I didn't think it was all that funny. Oh well...must be that everyone else is as low on sleep as I am.
And next, "ENLARE your subPOENA 4+++ inches! MAXXimus V fomular!"
Walk away from the conference table for a few seconds, when you come back there are no doughnuts left! Just a laptop and cell phone sitting there innocently. They'll never tell....
"Sir! Employment dip approaching 132 mark 7!"
"On...screen! What...could it...Sensors?"
"Sir, it appears to be a second-class hiring anomaly. They are pointing fingers, I suggest evasive action. Our treasury is not capable of withstanding a direct attack."
"Understood. It appears that...we can...not win this...one. Change our course to...braised shrimp and roast duck. Maximum warp!"
Who ya gonna call?
Infrasound BUSTERS!
Maybe this whole thing is an instinctive dinosaur early-detection system.
Don't know if I've ever tried it before, but hey, SCO: pure comedy gold! The cliche that never grows old! (whoa that rhymes...ok it's time for coffee now.)
Or......infrasound is how the ghosts are trying to communicate with us! All we have to do is record it and then speed up the tape! Maybe play it backwards too? You'd probably hear "Iiiii...am the ghost of Caldera.....bring me $699 or I shall not find eternal peeeaaaaace....."
Does anyone get the idea that essentially the RIAA would be happiest if the Internet did not exist, period? After all, their business model is based on passive entertainment mediums such as television and radio, and physical media distribution. The Internet gives people too much choice as to what they want to see.
For that matter, the Internet can be less offensive than TV or radio! I know a lot of parents who are horrified at the things children can see on today's media, and at least with the Internet the parents can have some small measure of control over what comes into their child's view.
Child pornography, phhft. It's pretty hypocritical, when the media exploitation of the newest underage pop star is verging on just that.
Sysadmin: "HA! I have patched all my software, yelled at all the users with weak passwords, locked down every possible port and continously monitor the allowed ones, and with this keystroke I will enable UNBREAKABLE encryption on every critical data file!"
*slams hand down to hit Enter key*
*hits bare desk*
Maybe, at least until the "1-Terabyte hack" comes out for this.
Sheesh. Even the low-end model is ridiculous. I cannot imagine anyone needing a PVR of more than eight hours capacity. If you need to save weeks of continuous TV, then you watch TV an awful lot. When are you going to find time to watch two weeks of saved TV, while you are so busy watching your live TV? I have this mental image of a hard-core TV watcher, sitting in front of a video wall tuned to 30 different channels in a room knee-deep in empty Funyuns bags.
What he's saying is that, yes, he can get cable broadband, but he's not down with The Man and the Corporations. Oh well.
My definition of broadband is "vastly improved over modem speeds," not "vastly improved over modem speeds and the CEO is not money-hungry." If that were the case, nobody has broadband.
I'm not sure what brings you to that conclusion, but whatever. I pays my money, I gets my bandwidth, I'm not in a contract so I can dump them at any time. The connection was off once, several months ago, for about 5 minutes. They haven't come and let the air out my car tires or anything, so I guess we're cool.
How's the latency on that wireless? I'd consider doing that if I lived closer to work, and if they had an OC-3....
Oh really? Because I am currently paying Time Warner for Roadrunner service alone, and no cable TV at all. Consistent 2Mbps, which works better for me than the shared T1's at work. I also use a cell phone instead of a land line (cell phone doubles as emergency portable internet connection, gets me about 100Kbits/s).
Honestly, the broadband sitution is not all that bad. You really can get broadband in nearly all semi-populated areas. Everyone whines that it's not everywhere, but this is a growing market...how long did it take before everyone had a telephone? And just recently, cell phone coverage (which is approaching ubiquitous at this point).
Hate to crush your fantasy, but it takes time to hook up wires, and it costs money to run them. It'll happen, and it's actually doing OK considering the massive land area we have to service in the U.S.
I found that I don't actually need music to get through my day. It can be a big distraction, especially if the object of the music is to garner as much attention for the artist as possible. Why buy it? It doesn't have any intrinsic value, just something that makes a box produce highly processed vibrations in the air.
A live performance is much better, because the artist is actually there and speaking to the audience through their music. It's the difference between a home-cooked meal and a squished, lukewarm McDonald's cheeseburger.
I've neither downloaded nor bought music for years. I don't want to drain my savings on the off chance I'd win the lawsuit lottery, and I don't want to pay the RIAA members any money to fund their racket.
They live in a dream world, thinking that all business problems can be solved by legal force. Bright idea! If they won't buy our stuff, let's sue them to get the money anyway! Whatever happened to studying the consumers and trying to develop a product they will buy?
The problem is this: they don't want to study the consumers. They want to control them. They are terrified that they are losing the ability to make and break artists, and define what is popular and what is not. Their whole business model revolves not around creating a quality product, but creating a slightly different product and brainwashing the consumers to buy it.
Do you honestly think anyone EVER seriously considered farming spiders for their silk? The idea of unimaginable numbers of spiders all together is chilling even to the bravest of us. And of course they'd discover that black widows or brown recluses or giant bird spiders produced the strongest silk, and then they would escape....
*shudder*
Imagine if Microsoft got their PVR rolling. Then they add a feature, say, when someone sends you an IM on the MSN network you can have a little notification or the actual message text scroll at the bottom of your TV screen. These are the kinds of things Microsoft has the ability to do, and the kinds of things it hopes will slowly pinch off the other IM networks until Microsoft can charge for IM services.
I don't see it happening, but at least some people will pay Microsoft for the priveledge.
Not sure why the parent post is marked Flamebait, I completely agree. The MSN client is so bloated that I won't use it.
What are IM systems for? Communication. There is no logic in restricting the end-user's choice of interface. You don't see telephone companies selling phones that won't work unless you call someone with another phone made by them, do you? If you want to control and profit from a service, you charge for the use of the communication channel and allow users to choose their interface.
That said, no one will use a pay IM service unless that's all there is. They're trying to force people to use their interface, then add so many features that everyone uses it and AIM/ICQ/Yahoo/Jabber die off...and then, open your checkbooks!