Science and technology are relatively new to humans; we've been evolving in essentially fantasy environments for thousands of years. This older environment is the only one that's had the chance to make a significant impact on our psychological genome. Aside from simple tribal affiliations, we're programmed a bit with feudalism. That's why struggles of national and global democracy, equality, etc are so difficult. Falling under authroity is something we're genetically conditioned to want.
I'd venture a guess that it's the most "successful" game in terms of the bottom line. It's a centralized network subscription service, not an independent software title. That means no pay, no play. It's successful because it's got a relatively foolproof way to coerce payment fom players.
First of all, unpublished data doesn't count. Gomes has the privilege of not only analyzing Anderson's data, but of criticizing Anderson's analysis. Anderson has none of that. Nothing to see here - literally!
Second, iTunes catalog is certainly skewed toward commercial catalogs, and not toward most musicians you'd find appealing to the Long Tail. Given this selection bias, is it any wonder Apple's data doesn't confirm Anderson's analysis?
Furthermore, I already went to a DSL ISP that rents pair from the local telco monopoly rather than be subjected to the abuses of network neutrality that Telus has already perpetrated bly blocking Union websites.
When I called Telus to disconnect, the service rep tried to tell me that they were posting content unlawfully (like addresses of Telus execs, blabhlabh). I said "You guys don't bother blocking all the rest of the illegal stuff out there on the net, why the hell are you starting here?" In retrospect, I came up with all sorts of smartass responses about the fact that they fail to filter far nastier crap like my favorite kiddy porn sites (yes, as a joke, stupid). Or "That's great. When I want someone to protect me from the Internet, I'll call you."
Not much of that was necessary, of course. To his credit, the service rep got one whiff of my displeasure and went about our business.
I've been with Uniserve for years, and have had no such shenanigans. Competition works wonders.
"Northrop described Skyguard as capable of destroying rockets, mortars, artillery shells, unmanned aerial vehicles, short-range ballistic missiles, as well as cruise missiles."
Remember that participatory panopticon? You know the one where common citizens watch the watchers with uavs to match Big brother's surveillance? The game just changed. Now, only Big Brother's drones can stay in the air.
Unless, of course, we have a "laser bubble shield" of our own. Then NOBODY can watch anybody. That is a completely different ball game...
I'm starting a pool on how long it takes before copyright holders sue them for paying unauthorized posters.
YouTube is bad enough, but there's no money involved to spur posting. If there's one thing a cartel hates worse than people giving away their stuff for free, it's people people giving away their stuff for money.
"It's really dangerous to design for a technical elite. We have to design for a broad majority of users."
By "dangerous", he means just to the corporate bottom line. by "we", he just means businesses.
The rest of us "elite" are being designed for just fine, thanks.
He does have a point about the difference between email and rss. That's why I swear by rss2email. it scans feeds, and wraps up items into my email inbox. best of both worlds.
I've been boycotting Yahoo for years - I don't buy any ads from them.
It's like DRM-encumbered CDs. For some, it may be a political issue; but for most, it's a product quality issue. If I don't buy your product or service because I don't like how you produce it (or something else), that's a boycott. If I don't buy it because I don't like the product or service, that's just plain old market action.
You don't target a Yahoo boycott at users; you target it at advertisers. Don't forget who the products are, and who the customers are.
The problem with liability isn't who the software comes from before bugs have been found; it's who is permitted to fix the bugs when they show up?
Vendors should be liable for bugs becuase//they are the only ones allowed to fix them//. If you give me permission to fix bugs as they're found, then it's my own damn fault if I don't. But if you insist that I come only to you to fix bugs, I damn well better have some recourse if you drag your ass.
If customers don't have modification rights, then they should demand rights to damages in case of negligence. Whether those rights are secured through existing contracts, or through legislation is an optional debate.
This model would mitigate lock-in pressure by proprietary vendors while preserving the competitiveness of FOSS.
The SHA series of digest algorithms are PART of the Secure Sockets Layer cryptographic protocols, which are far and away the most popular way to secure "https://" web sites that collect credit card information.
Soya3d is a 3d engine written as a Python module (really). Being a python beginner, and someone who hasn't written a lick of C in ten years, I can tell you it's EXCELLENT. It even comes with a sample 3rd person game, Balazar, that has been fun to play (although it's not quite done)//and// to tweak under the hood.
I highly recommend it.
This is over and above the other mentions of Ogre3d, Nevrax, Cube/Sauerbraten, the Quakes, Nexuiz, the Worldforge projects, etc.
By this logic, prices for concerts from indy unknowns should go down, because file sharing//increases// the sales of their records.
More likely is that mega-fame begets mega-greed. Any excuse will do.
They can set their ticket prices as high as they want - so long as they stop whining about sharing. Put down the campaign donations, and step away from my Congresspeople! If superstars say they're supposedly compensating their losses from sharing with higher ticket prices, then they should stop lobbying legislators for more legal handouts.
"Oh, you remember that whole market obsolescence bit? We were just kidding, really! See, we can just raise concert prices! No problem!"
"That's not bad! Hey, would you mind if we repealed the DMCA, then?"
Re:The problem of nerve impulse conduction
on
An Alternate Human
·
· Score: 1
Consider, though, that strong pain impulses from the limbs can prompt autonomic movement reactions immediately upon reaching the spinal cord, before it even has a chance to reach the brain.
Regardless of the way the language influences thought, you're going to get more respect if you speak the language of the people you're doing business with.
Even if you think the language dumbs down speakers and listeners, or even de-sensitizes them to unethical behaviour, the fact is that mastering the language is going to give you an edge. If your goal is to succeed within the business, learn it. If, on the other hand, your goal is to crusade for saner, kinder, gentler language, then by all means preach, and resist. Just be prepared to be outdone by competitors who make your bosses feel better and more informed.
ID is not a competitive theory. It is not an alternative to Evolution. It proposes no alternative model to explain the things Evolution attempts to explain with it's model.
Intelligent Design is a criticism of evolutionary theory's gaps and an elucidation of the things it doesn't yet convincingly explain. As such, it's constructive and valuable scientific criticism. It also points out that science isn't all-knowing, which has always been one of it's primary tenets (which is more than you can say for religions).
Intelligent Design is Creationism cut off from it's religious materials. Instead, religious models of biology are hushed up, taken out back, and made "implict" so that proponents of ID don't have be ridiculed on their behalf. Instead of proposing whacky religious theories of biology which would be tossed out in a heartbeat, they simply attack evolution and let people believe whatever they want. Of course, we all know exactly what those beliefs are.
Instead, ID focuses on criticizing the science behind darwinism, a discussion science should welcome - because that's how science works.
Where it goes wrong is where we lose focus. I think as long as we can keep the focus on darwinism, rather than creationism, the soundness of evolutionary theory will stand out - ESPECIALLY because of the criticisms ID levels at it.
I'd venture a guess that, while bees & tapeworms breakdown things from their original structures in order to fuel their own processes from smaller components, viruses don't bother breaking anything - they just use the existing biological machinery on hand more or less as they were intended - just, for their own purposes.
It's not so much that it doesn't exist, as that it's//hard to spot//.
1) Innovation happens faster, and so gets compared and intergrated more quickly with innovations already on the market. This makes TNBT more difficult to predict, but doesn't eliminate it. It's not so much that TNBT doesn't exist, but that looking for it for the purposes of betting on it is now too risky to be a profitable pasttime.
2) Innovations are now so complex, of necessity, that they often require cooperation of lots of of humans to get into a workable niche. Successful innovations tend to be emergent social phenomena rather than corporate brainchildren (Donofrio says this much, in fact).
"Leech it on your parents' cable modem, or stuff it in your pants, the only question I have is whether by pirating their media, are you still indirectly supporting their grip on content creation and distribution, by giving them free advertising and mindshare. I think the jury's still out on that."
I used to agree wholeheartedly with this take. I thought we needed to get over piracy, and start enriching the commons, instead.
It appears that sharing does indeed hurt the cartel's bottom line, rather than supporting their cultural hegemony. You might be perpetuating their popularity, but piracy really DOES hurt their bottom line - and those are the dollars that go toward bribing politicians. At the same time, smaller indy and commons acts are actually aided by increased sales as more people share them. The difference is scale. Once you get too popular, sharing backfires, but it's actually around the 75th percentile of artists.
So, for those who are aimed at bringing down the Hollywood plutocracy, the tactic seems to be: share. pirate. Share the indies and commonists you do like, and//even the pop sugar you don't//, because every lost boy band album sale is that much less revenue that can be used against us in our legislature.
Is this the same Terrorist Surveillance Act of 2006 that the Tories (er, Republicans, scuse me) advertised put "firm new limits" on Presidential power, as a compromise against launching a full Senate investigationinto the warrantless wiretapping program?
It's strange, because I've seen tons of reporting, but very few stories actually mention the name of the Act. how are citizens supposed to participate when they can't even identify legislation? Do//congresspeople// even know which laws they're voting on?.... don't answer that question. I don't want to know. *forehand*
There IS a lot of noise along with signal. The point of signal is that it outlasts noise. This is how natural selection works; the more variation you can get, the more fitness you can squeeze out of the patterns.
Is it so hard to believe that there aren't lots of private carpenters who've benefitted from the steady decline of carpentry tool prices? Yes, there are a lot of bad amateurs, there too, but, just like the web, there are probably many highly skilled craftsman who would otherwise be unable to create unless they worked for Ikea.
The analogy is stressed, because the costs of carpentry tools are large compared to the creative web works, but I think it holds.
Slashdot Mirror
Science and technology are relatively new to humans; we've been evolving in essentially fantasy environments for thousands of years. This older environment is the only one that's had the chance to make a significant impact on our psychological genome. Aside from simple tribal affiliations, we're programmed a bit with feudalism. That's why struggles of national and global democracy, equality, etc are so difficult. Falling under authroity is something we're genetically conditioned to want.
It's a theory.
I'd venture a guess that it's the most "successful" game in terms of the bottom line. It's a centralized network subscription service, not an independent software title. That means no pay, no play. It's successful because it's got a relatively foolproof way to coerce payment fom players.
First of all, unpublished data doesn't count. Gomes has the privilege of not only analyzing Anderson's data, but of criticizing Anderson's analysis. Anderson has none of that. Nothing to see here - literally!
Second, iTunes catalog is certainly skewed toward commercial catalogs, and not toward most musicians you'd find appealing to the Long Tail. Given this selection bias, is it any wonder Apple's data doesn't confirm Anderson's analysis?
That's a good argument.
Furthermore, I already went to a DSL ISP that rents pair from the local telco monopoly rather than be subjected to the abuses of network neutrality that Telus has already perpetrated bly blocking Union websites.
When I called Telus to disconnect, the service rep tried to tell me that they were posting content unlawfully (like addresses of Telus execs, blabhlabh). I said "You guys don't bother blocking all the rest of the illegal stuff out there on the net, why the hell are you starting here?" In retrospect, I came up with all sorts of smartass responses about the fact that they fail to filter far nastier crap like my favorite kiddy porn sites (yes, as a joke, stupid). Or "That's great. When I want someone to protect me from the Internet, I'll call you."
Not much of that was necessary, of course. To his credit, the service rep got one whiff of my displeasure and went about our business.
I've been with Uniserve for years, and have had no such shenanigans. Competition works wonders.
hmm...
"Northrop described Skyguard as capable of destroying rockets, mortars, artillery shells, unmanned aerial vehicles, short-range ballistic missiles, as well as cruise missiles."
Remember that participatory panopticon? You know the one where common citizens watch the watchers with uavs to match Big brother's surveillance? The game just changed. Now, only Big Brother's drones can stay in the air.
Unless, of course, we have a "laser bubble shield" of our own. Then NOBODY can watch anybody. That is a completely different ball game...
I'm starting a pool on how long it takes before copyright holders sue them for paying unauthorized posters.
YouTube is bad enough, but there's no money involved to spur posting. If there's one thing a cartel hates worse than people giving away their stuff for free, it's people people giving away their stuff for money.
"It's really dangerous to design for a technical elite. We have to design for a broad majority of users."
By "dangerous", he means just to the corporate bottom line. by "we", he just means businesses.
The rest of us "elite" are being designed for just fine, thanks.
He does have a point about the difference between email and rss. That's why I swear by rss2email. it scans feeds, and wraps up items into my email inbox. best of both worlds.
I've been boycotting Yahoo for years - I don't buy any ads from them.
It's like DRM-encumbered CDs. For some, it may be a political issue; but for most, it's a product quality issue. If I don't buy your product or service because I don't like how you produce it (or something else), that's a boycott. If I don't buy it because I don't like the product or service, that's just plain old market action.
You don't target a Yahoo boycott at users; you target it at advertisers. Don't forget who the products are, and who the customers are.
The problem with liability isn't who the software comes from before bugs have been found; it's who is permitted to fix the bugs when they show up?
//they are the only ones allowed to fix them//. If you give me permission to fix bugs as they're found, then it's my own damn fault if I don't. But if you insist that I come only to you to fix bugs, I damn well better have some recourse if you drag your ass.
Vendors should be liable for bugs becuase
If customers don't have modification rights, then they should demand rights to damages in case of negligence. Whether those rights are secured through existing contracts, or through legislation is an optional debate.
This model would mitigate lock-in pressure by proprietary vendors while preserving the competitiveness of FOSS.
SSL
The SHA series of digest algorithms are PART of the Secure Sockets Layer cryptographic protocols, which are far and away the most popular way to secure "https://" web sites that collect credit card information.
"...it appears that the public values security over privacy."
Well, it would seem that the part about giving away their privacy is all wrapped up.
Now, if only we could get that increasing security bit to actually work...
Soya3d is a 3d engine written as a Python module (really). Being a python beginner, and someone who hasn't written a lick of C in ten years, I can tell you it's EXCELLENT. It even comes with a sample 3rd person game, Balazar, that has been fun to play (although it's not quite done) //and// to tweak under the hood.
I highly recommend it.
This is over and above the other mentions of Ogre3d, Nevrax, Cube/Sauerbraten, the Quakes, Nexuiz, the Worldforge projects, etc.
Remember This Study?
//increases// the sales of their records.
By this logic, prices for concerts from indy unknowns should go down, because file sharing
More likely is that mega-fame begets mega-greed. Any excuse will do.
They can set their ticket prices as high as they want - so long as they stop whining about sharing. Put down the campaign donations, and step away from my Congresspeople! If superstars say they're supposedly compensating their losses from sharing with higher ticket prices, then they should stop lobbying legislators for more legal handouts.
"Oh, you remember that whole market obsolescence bit? We were just kidding, really! See, we can just raise concert prices! No problem!"
"That's not bad! Hey, would you mind if we repealed the DMCA, then?"
Consider, though, that strong pain impulses from the limbs can prompt autonomic movement reactions immediately upon reaching the spinal cord, before it even has a chance to reach the brain.
dispose of radioactive waste in the rainforest?
Wait a minute. so first we allow the existing species & trees to be lit up & die, then wait for new radiation-proof species to emerge?
Isn't the idea to keep the trees UP in the first place?
Furthermore, lions tigers & bears might come back quickly enough, but wouldn't trees take a few more... centuries?
Think of it like Chinese.
Regardless of the way the language influences thought, you're going to get more respect if you speak the language of the people you're doing business with.
Even if you think the language dumbs down speakers and listeners, or even de-sensitizes them to unethical behaviour, the fact is that mastering the language is going to give you an edge. If your goal is to succeed within the business, learn it. If, on the other hand, your goal is to crusade for saner, kinder, gentler language, then by all means preach, and resist. Just be prepared to be outdone by competitors who make your bosses feel better and more informed.
ID is not a competitive theory. It is not an alternative to Evolution. It proposes no alternative model to explain the things Evolution attempts to explain with it's model.
Intelligent Design is a criticism of evolutionary theory's gaps and an elucidation of the things it doesn't yet convincingly explain. As such, it's constructive and valuable scientific criticism. It also points out that science isn't all-knowing, which has always been one of it's primary tenets (which is more than you can say for religions).
Intelligent Design is Creationism cut off from it's religious materials. Instead, religious models of biology are hushed up, taken out back, and made "implict" so that proponents of ID don't have be ridiculed on their behalf. Instead of proposing whacky religious theories of biology which would be tossed out in a heartbeat, they simply attack evolution and let people believe whatever they want. Of course, we all know exactly what those beliefs are.
Instead, ID focuses on criticizing the science behind darwinism, a discussion science should welcome - because that's how science works.
Where it goes wrong is where we lose focus. I think as long as we can keep the focus on darwinism, rather than creationism, the soundness of evolutionary theory will stand out - ESPECIALLY because of the criticisms ID levels at it.
Uncritical implementation of the Unity Fallacy
We are becoming a nation of suits...
I'd venture a guess that, while bees & tapeworms breakdown things from their original structures in order to fuel their own processes from smaller components, viruses don't bother breaking anything - they just use the existing biological machinery on hand more or less as they were intended - just, for their own purposes.
In other words, they're hackers.
Mob rule has it's problems, but I'll take it over plutocratic aristocracy any day of the week.
It's not so much that it doesn't exist, as that it's //hard to spot//.
1) Innovation happens faster, and so gets compared and intergrated more quickly with innovations already on the market. This makes TNBT more difficult to predict, but doesn't eliminate it. It's not so much that TNBT doesn't exist, but that looking for it for the purposes of betting on it is now too risky to be a profitable pasttime.
2) Innovations are now so complex, of necessity, that they often require cooperation of lots of of humans to get into a workable niche. Successful innovations tend to be emergent social phenomena rather than corporate brainchildren (Donofrio says this much, in fact).
"Leech it on your parents' cable modem, or stuff it in your pants, the only question I have is whether by pirating their media, are you still indirectly supporting their grip on content creation and distribution, by giving them free advertising and mindshare. I think the jury's still out on that."
1 &tid=98&tid=95
//even the pop sugar you don't//, because every lost boy band album sale is that much less revenue that can be used against us in our legislature.
I used to agree wholeheartedly with this take. I thought we needed to get over piracy, and start enriching the commons, instead.
Then I read this:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/26/14622
It appears that sharing does indeed hurt the cartel's bottom line, rather than supporting their cultural hegemony. You might be perpetuating their popularity, but piracy really DOES hurt their bottom line - and those are the dollars that go toward bribing politicians. At the same time, smaller indy and commons acts are actually aided by increased sales as more people share them. The difference is scale. Once you get too popular, sharing backfires, but it's actually around the 75th percentile of artists.
So, for those who are aimed at bringing down the Hollywood plutocracy, the tactic seems to be: share. pirate. Share the indies and commonists you do like, and
Is this the same Terrorist Surveillance Act of 2006 that the Tories (er, Republicans, scuse me) advertised put "firm new limits" on Presidential power, as a compromise against launching a full Senate investigationinto the warrantless wiretapping program?
//congresspeople// even know which laws they're voting on? .... don't answer that question. I don't want to know. *forehand*
It's strange, because I've seen tons of reporting, but very few stories actually mention the name of the Act. how are citizens supposed to participate when they can't even identify legislation? Do
Yes. You, also, are correct.
There IS a lot of noise along with signal. The point of signal is that it outlasts noise. This is how natural selection works; the more variation you can get, the more fitness you can squeeze out of the patterns.
Is it so hard to believe that there aren't lots of private carpenters who've benefitted from the steady decline of carpentry tool prices? Yes, there are a lot of bad amateurs, there too, but, just like the web, there are probably many highly skilled craftsman who would otherwise be unable to create unless they worked for Ikea.
The analogy is stressed, because the costs of carpentry tools are large compared to the creative web works, but I think it holds.