The price per gallon of gasoline in the US is mostly tax.
In New York state, where the highest gasoline tax exists in the US, you pay around 50 cents per gallon in state and federal taxes. National average is around 38 cents per gallon.
OK, it costs Sony $900 to make a machine that they plan to sell for $600. Clearly, if a third party would sell them a one for $700, they'd buy it, saving themselves $200 compared with manufacturing one themselves... So, here's my win-win plan:
1. Buy PS3 from Sony at $600. 2. Sell PS3 to Sony for $700. 3. Profit! 4. Repeat!
I don't know why you have such a hard time seeing this. Now if there was a spider out there that you could download and run out-of-the-box (for free) that matched the functionality of the Feeds, then you'd have a strong case to say that the Feeds weren't anything new. But notice that this only strengthens my central case. There is a difference between Feeds or no Feeds, and the only way you can reduce that difference to 0 is with the introduction of an imaginary product that is, essentially, the Feeds.
Of course it strengthens my argument too. Don't publish data you don't want in a feed, because bam, someone will make it a feed.;)
But is it going to far when you say those itunes you bought can only be played in pristine quality on an ipod? What if you opt for the zune? or if you change to a oss os? Would you want to leave your itunes behind and say "oh well, I'm not allowed to listen to those anymore"?
I'm not convinced that listening to music in its original pristine quality is an inalienable right. When lps were king, as soon as you started listening to the music you bought, its quality started to degrade due to scratches and general groove wear due to mechanical contact. And you couldn't just bring the record back to the store and get a replacement. The quality was about as good as you treated your collection. And if you wanted to back it up, you'd copy to cassette (or reel-to-reel, like my grandpa used to do with all his jazz and polka records) with significantly reduced quality. That analog duplication may be the only way to backup my music collection is now an infringement on my rights? It certainly wasn't 30 years ago. It's when they start to outlaw or heavily regulate the sale of microphones that I'll be worried.
That doesn't make any sense, plus once people buy $500 of ipod only tunes they are unlikely to want to change to a new service, aiding market domination and lack of choice.
Market dominance is certainly an issue. I think it's encouraging that so early in the development of legal downloads that there are at least 3 different major music download platforms: iTunes, playsForSure, and straight mp3. Again, moving between these services may not be convenient or "lossless", but it's possible and, I believe, still legal.
>>> To throw your own argument back in your face - since when is artifically limiting my >>> ability to use something I bought as I see fit a "right" of some company?
>> High performance cars artificially limit your top speed. Heck, 50cc scooters in some >> markets do this. There are workarounds.
> Car analogies. They need to go, ok? We definitely need a car-analogy equivalent of Godwin's law.
It wasn't an analogy. It was an answer to a question. A car is another product which may be artificially limited by the manufacturer.
Sure, because DRM never interfered with fair use, or anything... and all countries have the exact same copyright laws as the US.
What's stopping you from doing analog recording off the headphone jack to get your fair use? Or using a microphone if they eventually manage to close the "analog hole"? Fair use isn't the same as "convenient, unadulterated, pristine copies that preserve track info."
To throw your own argument back in your face - since when is artifically limiting my ability to use something I bought as I see fit a "right" of some company?
High performance cars artificially limit your top speed. Heck, 50cc scooters in some markets do this. There are workarounds.
But a more pressing example is how food is genetically modified so that the seeds of the produce you buy are infertile, so you can't plant those seeds and grow your own. Recently, I saw a bamboo tree for sale at a garden center with a warning that said that copyright law made it illegal to make offspring of the plant (however that is done with bamboo?). It makes me wonder why there is so much debate about mere entertainment.
Your point is: the average facebook user isn't getting live feeds unless facebook provides them. This is true.
My point is: live feeds can be had from facebook without facebook providing them. You call this irrelevant. I call it reality. Information you publish about yourself can and will be used in ways you don't expect.
I don't need to be a programmer to download and run a facebook spider script. Search for "facebook spider" and "facebook rss", and you'll find that people were already doing this before.
while true:
for each url:
wget url > file.html
diff oldfile.html file.html > event
cp file.html oldfile.html
A small amount of effort up front yields an infinitely free resource. The amortized "work" is zero over time.
The whole issue is that people are "creeped out" that their data is getting consumed immediately. The fact is, as a producer I have no control over whether my data is periodically polled. If you don't want your data available as a feed, don't publish it.
> So what it came down to is someone not doing the proper procedure.
I think they missed the fine print in step 3: Chase Inc. Procedure manual. Page 1.
While cleaning out the server room:
1. Place trash barrel in center of room. 2. Remove tape from backup drive. 3. Toss backup tape across room to storage rack on opposite side of room.* 4. Collect all trash and place in trash barrel. 5. Bring trash to dumpster.
* Be sure not to allow tape to land in trash barrel.
Maybe you understand what I'm saying in concrete terms. I can write a computer program (say, a script in Python) to periodically pull down the html of all my friends' pages at myspace. Based on the changes between revisions, I can extract events as a "news feed". Writing such a script is not difficult. The only difference between this and a myspace-provided news feed is that my information will be delayed somewhat. Even if it's delayed by 5 minutes, it is still "realtime" for the type of information we are talking about.
Similarly, checking out the latest article from blog Y is not the same thing as subscribing to the RSS feed from blog Y. Some people may prefer one to the other, but they are not the same thing The information you get, however, is. So this proves my point: that there's more to this question than just what information is available. This is so manifestly obvious that it's frustrating to believe there are people too stupid to realize this, and thick enough to actually argue that it's not the case.
Put me in the stupid column then. It's basic information theory. Signalling versus polling. The only informational difference between an external signal and a repetitious poll is the latency of the information. If I can poll your information with a reasonably high frequency, you are essentially providing a feed.
"No one likes having their every move watched," said Igor Hiller, 17, a recent high school graduate from Palo Alto, California. "Me and my friends are just feeling really creeped out. It's Big Brotherish."
I hope he carries a protest sign that says "Dude, I'm Like Totally Creeped Out."
In other words, if someone claiming to be reporter Joe Blow somehow gets Joe Blow's records... how do you pin it on Private Eye S. Bullets (s for sweating)?
PI Bullets had an IP address. Namely, 68.99.17.80.
>> I remember reading one success story of some jazz musician that was bringing in about $20000 per month from CD sales on mp3.com
> You remember stories like these because they make you feel good, not because they are true or even plausible.
If you recall, mp3.com paid each artist for each time a song was listened to. For a while, they also had a place where you could see how much money any artist had taken in this way. There were some otherwise unknown artists who took in thousands of dollars in these micropayments. I definitely remember a guy who made techno tracks that had pulled in over $100K in total. Unless the mp3.com numbers were just lies, this really did happen.
What I would like is for me to be able to legally watch the Friends DVDs that I've bought on my computer.
You bought Friends DVDs?
this is like me wanting to put my bedsheets on my couch and sleep there, but for some reason the bedsheet makers only want me to put bedsheets on a bed, so it's illegal.
The old bedsheet analogy again. Oh, wait. This is definitely the first time I've heard it. What about this: I want to play my old Abba 8-track tapes on my CD player. An equally horrible analogy, but one that supports the other side of the argument.
Slashdot Mirror
The price per gallon of gasoline in the US is mostly tax.
In New York state, where the highest gasoline tax exists in the US, you pay around 50 cents per gallon in state and federal taxes. National average is around 38 cents per gallon.
OK, it costs Sony $900 to make a machine that they plan to sell for $600. Clearly, if a third party would sell them a one for $700, they'd buy it, saving themselves $200 compared with manufacturing one themselves... So, here's my win-win plan:
1. Buy PS3 from Sony at $600.
2. Sell PS3 to Sony for $700.
3. Profit!
4. Repeat!
CDs just represent a disk full of data, vinyls are real music.
An LP is a disk full of data. A guy playing guitar or oboe or whatever is "real music". Any medium that reproduces live performance is virtualization.
The article is about how the internet enables "guilty pleasures". I believe the author is using the term "pop music" as a euphemism for porn.
Laughing uncontrollably. Thanks.
I don't know why you have such a hard time seeing this. Now if there was a spider out there that you could download and run out-of-the-box (for free) that matched the functionality of the Feeds, then you'd have a strong case to say that the Feeds weren't anything new. But notice that this only strengthens my central case. There is a difference between Feeds or no Feeds, and the only way you can reduce that difference to 0 is with the introduction of an imaginary product that is, essentially, the Feeds.
;)
Of course it strengthens my argument too. Don't publish data you don't want in a feed, because bam, someone will make it a feed.
But is it going to far when you say those itunes you bought can only be played in pristine quality on an ipod? What if you opt for the zune? or if you change to a oss os? Would you want to leave your itunes behind and say "oh well, I'm not allowed to listen to those anymore"?
I'm not convinced that listening to music in its original pristine quality is an inalienable right. When lps were king, as soon as you started listening to the music you bought, its quality started to degrade due to scratches and general groove wear due to mechanical contact. And you couldn't just bring the record back to the store and get a replacement. The quality was about as good as you treated your collection. And if you wanted to back it up, you'd copy to cassette (or reel-to-reel, like my grandpa used to do with all his jazz and polka records) with significantly reduced quality. That analog duplication may be the only way to backup my music collection is now an infringement on my rights? It certainly wasn't 30 years ago. It's when they start to outlaw or heavily regulate the sale of microphones that I'll be worried.
That doesn't make any sense, plus once people buy $500 of ipod only tunes they are unlikely to want to change to a new service, aiding market domination and lack of choice.
Market dominance is certainly an issue. I think it's encouraging that so early in the development of legal downloads that there are at least 3 different major music download platforms: iTunes, playsForSure, and straight mp3. Again, moving between these services may not be convenient or "lossless", but it's possible and, I believe, still legal.
>>> To throw your own argument back in your face - since when is artifically limiting my
>>> ability to use something I bought as I see fit a "right" of some company?
>> High performance cars artificially limit your top speed. Heck, 50cc scooters in some
>> markets do this. There are workarounds.
> Car analogies. They need to go, ok? We definitely need a car-analogy equivalent of Godwin's law.
It wasn't an analogy. It was an answer to a question. A car is another product which may
be artificially limited by the manufacturer.
Sure, because DRM never interfered with fair use, or anything... and all countries have the exact same copyright laws as the US.
What's stopping you from doing analog recording off the headphone jack to get your fair use? Or using a microphone if they eventually manage to close the "analog hole"? Fair use isn't the same as "convenient, unadulterated, pristine copies that preserve track info."
To throw your own argument back in your face - since when is artifically limiting my ability to use something I bought as I see fit a "right" of some company?
High performance cars artificially limit your top speed. Heck, 50cc scooters in some markets do this. There are workarounds.
But a more pressing example is how food is genetically modified so that the seeds of the produce you buy are infertile, so you can't plant those seeds and grow your own. Recently, I saw a bamboo tree for sale at a garden center with a warning that said that copyright law made it illegal to make offspring of the plant (however that is done with bamboo?). It makes me wonder why there is so much debate about mere entertainment.
Your point is: the average facebook user isn't getting live feeds unless facebook provides them. This is true.
My point is: live feeds can be had from facebook without facebook providing them. You call this irrelevant. I call it reality. Information you publish about yourself can and will be used in ways you don't expect.
I don't need to be a programmer to download and run a facebook spider script. Search for "facebook spider" and "facebook rss", and you'll find that people were already doing this before.
But when someone makes assumptions like "the average Facebook user can write Python scripts"
Nice quote. Who said it?
Not necessary. The humor came through quite clearly. ;)
Calling people "dumb" before making your point is not generally an effective approach to influencing people. Take a look at http://www.amazon.com/103-6581941-1251817?ie=UTF8& s=books.
Regards,
Mike
Seriously, the up-front effort is not high.
while true:
for each url:
wget url > file.html
diff oldfile.html file.html > event
cp file.html oldfile.html
A small amount of effort up front yields an infinitely free resource. The amortized "work" is zero over time.
The whole issue is that people are "creeped out" that their data is getting consumed immediately. The fact is, as a producer I have no control over whether my data is periodically polled. If you don't want your data available as a feed, don't publish it.
> So what it came down to is someone not doing the proper procedure.
I think they missed the fine print in step 3:
Chase Inc.
Procedure manual.
Page 1.
While cleaning out the server room:
1. Place trash barrel in center of room.
2. Remove tape from backup drive.
3. Toss backup tape across room to storage rack on opposite side of room.*
4. Collect all trash and place in trash barrel.
5. Bring trash to dumpster.
* Be sure not to allow tape to land in trash barrel.
Maybe you understand what I'm saying in concrete terms. I can write a computer program (say, a script in Python) to periodically pull down the html of all my friends' pages at myspace. Based on the changes between revisions, I can extract events as a "news feed". Writing such a script is not difficult. The only difference between this and a myspace-provided news feed is that my information will be delayed somewhat. Even if it's delayed by 5 minutes, it is still "realtime" for the type of information we are talking about.
Similarly, checking out the latest article from blog Y is not the same thing as subscribing to the RSS feed from blog Y. Some people may prefer one to the other, but they are not the same thing The information you get, however, is. So this proves my point: that there's more to this question than just what information is available. This is so manifestly obvious that it's frustrating to believe there are people too stupid to realize this, and thick enough to actually argue that it's not the case.
Put me in the stupid column then. It's basic information theory. Signalling versus polling. The only informational difference between an external signal and a repetitious poll is the latency of the information. If I can poll your information with a reasonably high frequency, you are essentially providing a feed.
"No one likes having their every move watched," said Igor Hiller, 17, a recent high school graduate from Palo Alto, California. "Me and my friends are just feeling really creeped out. It's Big Brotherish."
I hope he carries a protest sign that says "Dude, I'm Like Totally Creeped Out."
In other words, if someone claiming to be reporter Joe Blow somehow gets Joe Blow's records... how do you pin it on Private Eye S. Bullets (s for sweating)?
PI Bullets had an IP address. Namely, 68.99.17.80.
echo "No"
>> I remember reading one success story of some jazz musician that was bringing in about $20000 per month from CD sales on mp3.com
> You remember stories like these because they make you feel good, not because they are true or even plausible.
If you recall, mp3.com paid each artist for each time a song was listened to. For a while, they also had a place where you could see how much money any artist had taken in this way. There were some otherwise unknown artists who took in thousands of dollars in these micropayments. I definitely remember a guy who made techno tracks that had pulled in over $100K in total. Unless the mp3.com numbers were just lies, this really did happen.
What I would like is for me to be able to legally watch the Friends DVDs that I've bought on my computer.
You bought Friends DVDs?
this is like me wanting to put my bedsheets on my couch and sleep there, but for some reason the bedsheet makers only want me to put bedsheets on a bed, so it's illegal.
The old bedsheet analogy again. Oh, wait. This is definitely the first time I've heard it. What about this: I want to play my old Abba 8-track tapes on my CD player. An equally horrible analogy, but one that supports the other side of the argument.
Naming something a planet or not naming it one does not change its properties.
Over 100 posts and this appears to be the only one by someone with a clue. Well done.
No, in the name of "Rights Management". Security is something completely different, and much less important (apparently)
Apparently, MS doesn't know the difference:
"all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection"
By any reasonable definition of "malware", there probably doesn't exist any that involves getting around content protection.
Show me anywhere that evolution (that is, where one species changes into another, one of many definitions) has ever been readily observable.
Larus gulls, Ensatina salamanders, and Greenish Warblers