You forget one important clue against: It isn't funny enough to be a parody.
An example from the site:
Fact: Videogames have been proven to prevent the development of the proper social skills and interaction needed for a long happy and enjoyable life.
That's basically the same thing that many child development experts say, like here. I think that it was probably meant as a parody but is a very poorly executed one. He needs to inject more hyperbole and sarcasm.
What makes them think that people will pay extra to listen to music? People may pay extra if they get to download the music and burn it to CDs and transfer it to their MP3 players, but I can't imagine Tivo getting away with that when others have tried and failed.
And I can't even imagine how they could get people to pay extra to show their own photos on their own TV.
As a Tivo subscriber, I find it alarming that these guys are flailing around aimlessly with stupid business models like these. It makes me think that their days truly are numbered.
If you read the actual ruling carefully, they adress this:
(4) Related Legislation: The Plant Breeders' Rights Act
The interpretation of an ambiguous law may be informed by the substance and the form of subsequent legislation. The Plant Breeders' Rights Act is of significance to the interpretation of the Patent Act and the issue of its applicabiilty to higher life forms. Although Parliament enacted special legislation for the protection of plant breeders, it did not address other higher life forms. Moreover, the passage of the Plant Breeders' Rights Act demonstrates that mechanisms other than the Patent Act may be used to encourage inventors to undertake innovative activity in the field of biotechnology. Many of the issues that arose with respect to intellectual property protection for plant varieties also arise when considering the patentability of other higher life forms. If a special legislative scheme was needed to protect plant varieties, a subset of higher life forms, a similar scheme may also be necessary to deal with the patenting of higher life forms in general. It is beyond the competence of this Court to address in a comprehensive fashion the issues associated with the patentability of higher life forms.
In other words, plants are covered, animals are not.
Let me get this straight. These guys create a mouse that is susceptable to cancer by injecting it with a bunch of cancer causing genes and you get all misty eyed and start to wax poetic about God?
What does God have to do with injecting a mouse full of cancer causing genes?
Well, that link pretty much proves my point for me. The world is full of nuts and fruits and kooks and flakes, but very few of them are actually doing cutting edge science. If these people succeed in human cloning I'll eat the first one.
People will talk about what sheep we used to be, sitting in front of the television and waiting for whatever crap the networks chose to shovel in our direction. And then came cable; the internet; Tivo; grass roots fan sites; leeching our favorite episodes from usenet, IRC and p2p...
The day of the networks and the suits is over. Soon, very soon we the consumers will be in control.
Craig Venter and Nobel prize winner Hamilton Smith (the guys who brought you the human genome a decade earlier than expected) are teaming up again to create a biologically based
nanomachine. They plan to strip the extraneous genes out of the already tiny Mycoplasma genitalium, creating a platform to which they can add back genes of interest.
This technology is much closer to fruition than nanotech. In fact, it is practically around the corner.
Unfortunately, mad scientists have a bad habit of eventually succeeding.
Really? I'd be interested in hearing about a mad scientist who actually succeeded. As far as I know, our most horrific creations (V2 rockets and atomic bombs for example) have been the result of massive government programs.
Alan Rickman's Severus Snape is practically a bit part here,
That's too bad about Snape. He was absolutley perfect in the first film. I loved the scene where he introduces the students to his potions class. The uncut version from the special features of the dvd is even better!
but Richard Harris's Dumbledore gets a lot of scenes.
Ahh, but good news about Dumbledore! His is probably the most interesting character in the first book, but some of his best lines got truncated.
Honestly, I don't know what the series will do without Richard Harris (he died recently). David Heyman, the producer of Harry Potter has already admitted that Harris is "irreplaceable". He's not just giving a polite eulogy either. Harris was spot on as Dumbledore. In fact his calm, reasoned, lilting interpretation added to my appreciation of the old wizard.
Richard Harris will be sorely missed.
P.S. Not to dismiss Harris's other roles in a varied and interesting career, but I don't want to stray off topic.
This is one of those truly awesome ideas that just makes so much sense. Online shopping could be such a boon, especially to people in my demographic, busy parents who buy a lot of food but don't have the time to spend in the store and are tired of fighting to keep the kids riding in one of those carts.
But... I've been saying that since 1997. Peapod was a great idea. WebVan, great idea. I've never tried any of them and I'm a died in the wool geek and early adopter and all of that. I don't know why I've not tried them but I just haven't and I expect that there are a lot of people like me who won't be trying it anytime soon.
It's just really hard ot get people to change something as basic and as feral as food shopping.
Frankly I just don't see what he is whining about. An example: in his article he gives a link to a unsurprisingly glowing biography of the Mayor of San Francisco. He complains about a lack of information about the office itself, but if you actually go to the Mayor's home page there is a ton of information! You get the Mayor's budget proposal, his schedule, his address, phone number, e-mail, links to offices under the Mayor, transcripts of speeches, etc. What exactly was he expecting, pictures of the Mayor in compromising situations?
His main point seems to be that government web sites should be dedicated to organizing grass roots groups. First of all, the idea of the government organizing grass roots groups is oxymoronic. It is also a pretty dumb idea. I can just imagine the paranoia if the government tried to monopolize all of the grass roots organizations by hosting them on government web sites. "I spent the last 5 hours typing up my opposition to the mayor's speech when my computer crashed and the whole thing was lost. Then I got to thinking, who controls the web site? (The mayor.) Was it really a mistake that my post was lost?"
This guy, Plotkin, should go back and dig up some real abuses to complain about. Lacking that, this article just sounds like a big long whine.
To all of those who claim that you are stupid if you don't read every EULA that you click through.
Well, I don't.
Maybe I am stupid but the way I figure it, the odds of somebody actually trying to enforce a EULA that I click through are so miniscule that they are damn close to zero. So let's assume that the odds of a EULA being relevant to my life are 1 in 1,000,001 (usually written as 1:1,000,000 against. In order for it to be worth spending 5 minutes of my life to examine the EULA, then the penalty for violating the EULA should be 1,000,000 times 5 minutes, about 9.5 years. About 12.7 years if you account for waking/sleeping hours.
Currently nothing that I do on my home computer is worth 12.7 years of my life. In fact, since the maximum damages I could expect to pay for violating most EULAs are a few thousand dollars or less, reading a EULA is dumber than playing the lottery!
But buying a company solely for its IP, stripping the company to the bone and firing all of its employees is a fairly common practice in business. (Although usually this is done with software or patent IP not music, which is readily licensed.)
Making the songs non assignable, protects the company you licensed them to. It also prevents your arch enemy from licensing your stuff by acquisition.
No, of course not. But the same could be said of food, and that is relatively cheap and abundant. If we can't manage to adequately feed everyone, how do we expect the pharmeceutical companies to provide them all with the latest wonder drug?
One of the true tragedies of our modern day health care system is that it is exponentially cheaper to treat many diseases with drugs than with surgery. However, the government will pay for the surgery but not for drug therapy. In my opinion it is the governmental health support programs for the needy (medicare/medicaid) that are responsible for poor people going without drugs. Poor people couldn't afford AZT even from the cheapest generic drug supplier.
I appreciate your use of hyperbole. But it might help to inject some facts into the discussion.
fact 1: The figure $12.50 is taken from the article itself. This is the real number. So before you start complaining about outrageous licensing fees maybe you should do a little bit of digging to see just how outrageous those fees actually are.
fact 2: Patents expire 17 years from date of issue or 20 years from date of filing. So 120 years is a bit silly.
Look, I could object to Aibo hacking on the grounds that somebody might develop an attack Aibo that will be programmed to roam the streets, ripping people throats out. But let's try to get a grip, shall we?
It could very well be a win win sitution, and not part of a zero-sum game.
It is already a win win situation. Patients pay a little bit of extra money. This money is sent to the research institutions with a proven success record. They in turn sink this money back into more research. It's a positive feedback loop. If you produce things that people need, you get paid more and most of that money goes back into the research.
Pharmaceutical companies are the most profitable companies in the world
Apparently your high school teachers never bothered to explain capitalism to you. Let me try.
Is your health important to you? That's a rhetorical question, of course it is. In a capitalist society industries that are important to us should make the most profit. If the pharmaceutical business did not make money, nobody would invest in it. No investment means no research, no innovation, no new products, no miracle cures. Is that what you want?
In a capitalistic society, companies that make useful products are supposed to be profitable. If they aren't then the whole system breaks down.
This sort of research should be publicly funded and controled.
Well, that would be socialism. Luckily I don't even have to argue with you there. If you want socialism, you're in the wrong country for it (assuming that you are American or from one of the many other capitalistic countries out there, my apologies if this is incorrect). You claim that pharmaceutical companies should be government controlled because they are so important. I say that my health is too important to hand it over to the government for control. I'd rather have those greedy scientists who think that they can make a quick buck by saving my life over a bunch of government bureaucrats.
A lot of people are using analogies to muddy the situation. Let's dispense with the analogies and talk about the specific facts mentioned in the articles.
Doctor: We need to run some tests to see if your unborn child has Canavan disease. You have your choice, the expensive test or the cheaper test.
Patient: What's the difference between the tests?
Doctor: They're the same test but with the expensive test we charge $12.50 extra and send that money to the people who discovered the genetic marker in the first place.
Patient: And if I choose the cheaper test?
Doctor: Then the people who did the original research get screwed. But hey, if they had wanted to recoup any of their investment in research they should have kept it a secret.
That's the real choice here. Do the people who did the original research get paid, or do they get screwed?
With TiVo it is the guide that appeals to most people. Record Simpsons whenever it is on, not just the scheduled time that you know about. Never miss the last half of your favorite show's Christmas special. Have new stuff recommended based on your previous viewing habits.
Providing TV guide information is just not something that anybody is interested in doing as a hobby. It's just data entry. No fun at all.
Incidentally, I think that TiVo should sell their guide info without linking it to the TiVo hardware. Rumor is that they don't make any money on the hardware anyway. So let independant programmers set up their own PVR with TiVo like scheduling software that ties in to TiVo's guide.
I went into my local Circuit City before the new year. I asked to buy a TiVo and was told that they were sold out. I put one on order with a deposit. I finally canceled the order after a month of waiting because I want to see what happens with TiVo 2.
If TiVo's having trouble getting these things off the shelves, that's news to me. I could have been a bit more proactive about it and I'm sure that I could find a dozen places on the web with TiVos available. But they seem to be selling quite well in my neck of the woods.
Hmm, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but things haven't improved much. This message should have tipped you off:
**
First Post!!!!!! (Score:1)
by stu72 (stu@shelf.dyndns.org) on Thursday January 24, @04:45PM (#2934533)
(User #96650 Info | http://shelf.dyndns.org/~stu/)
What do I win?
(Your message is number 487 in this discussion. This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.)
Slashdot Mirror
Something that took me way too long to figure out.
Girls want to have sex almost as badly as you do. You just have to give them an excuse to do it.
It was drowning out the sound from the soothing cd I listen to while I sleep.
Errr uhm. You realize that you can get this functionality simply by not subscribing to the service right?
Tivo has simple record by time and channel functions. No service required.
An example from the site:
That's basically the same thing that many child development experts say, like here. I think that it was probably meant as a parody but is a very poorly executed one. He needs to inject more hyperbole and sarcasm.What makes them think that people will pay extra to listen to music? People may pay extra if they get to download the music and burn it to CDs and transfer it to their MP3 players, but I can't imagine Tivo getting away with that when others have tried and failed.
And I can't even imagine how they could get people to pay extra to show their own photos on their own TV.
As a Tivo subscriber, I find it alarming that these guys are flailing around aimlessly with stupid business models like these. It makes me think that their days truly are numbered.
Let me get this straight. These guys create a mouse that is susceptable to cancer by injecting it with a bunch of cancer causing genes and you get all misty eyed and start to wax poetic about God?
What does God have to do with injecting a mouse full of cancer causing genes?
http://www.clonaid.com/
Well, that link pretty much proves my point for me. The world is full of nuts and fruits and kooks and flakes, but very few of them are actually doing cutting edge science. If these people succeed in human cloning I'll eat the first one.
People will talk about what sheep we used to be, sitting in front of the television and waiting for whatever crap the networks chose to shovel in our direction. And then came cable; the internet; Tivo; grass roots fan sites; leeching our favorite episodes from usenet, IRC and p2p...
The day of the networks and the suits is over. Soon, very soon we the consumers will be in control.
This technology is much closer to fruition than nanotech. In fact, it is practically around the corner.
Really? I'd be interested in hearing about a mad scientist who actually succeeded. As far as I know, our most horrific creations (V2 rockets and atomic bombs for example) have been the result of massive government programs.
That's too bad about Snape. He was absolutley perfect in the first film. I loved the scene where he introduces the students to his potions class. The uncut version from the special features of the dvd is even better!
but Richard Harris's Dumbledore gets a lot of scenes.
Ahh, but good news about Dumbledore! His is probably the most interesting character in the first book, but some of his best lines got truncated.
Honestly, I don't know what the series will do without Richard Harris (he died recently). David Heyman, the producer of Harry Potter has already admitted that Harris is "irreplaceable". He's not just giving a polite eulogy either. Harris was spot on as Dumbledore. In fact his calm, reasoned, lilting interpretation added to my appreciation of the old wizard.
Richard Harris will be sorely missed.
P.S. Not to dismiss Harris's other roles in a varied and interesting career, but I don't want to stray off topic.
This is one of those truly awesome ideas that just makes so much sense. Online shopping could be such a boon, especially to people in my demographic, busy parents who buy a lot of food but don't have the time to spend in the store and are tired of fighting to keep the kids riding in one of those carts.
But... I've been saying that since 1997. Peapod was a great idea. WebVan, great idea. I've never tried any of them and I'm a died in the wool geek and early adopter and all of that. I don't know why I've not tried them but I just haven't and I expect that there are a lot of people like me who won't be trying it anytime soon.
It's just really hard ot get people to change something as basic and as feral as food shopping.
His main point seems to be that government web sites should be dedicated to organizing grass roots groups. First of all, the idea of the government organizing grass roots groups is oxymoronic. It is also a pretty dumb idea. I can just imagine the paranoia if the government tried to monopolize all of the grass roots organizations by hosting them on government web sites. "I spent the last 5 hours typing up my opposition to the mayor's speech when my computer crashed and the whole thing was lost. Then I got to thinking, who controls the web site? (The mayor.) Was it really a mistake that my post was lost?"
This guy, Plotkin, should go back and dig up some real abuses to complain about. Lacking that, this article just sounds like a big long whine.
To all of those who claim that you are stupid if you don't read every EULA that you click through.
Well, I don't.
Maybe I am stupid but the way I figure it, the odds of somebody actually trying to enforce a EULA that I click through are so miniscule that they are damn close to zero. So let's assume that the odds of a EULA being relevant to my life are 1 in 1,000,001 (usually written as 1:1,000,000 against. In order for it to be worth spending 5 minutes of my life to examine the EULA, then the penalty for violating the EULA should be 1,000,000 times 5 minutes, about 9.5 years. About 12.7 years if you account for waking/sleeping hours.
Currently nothing that I do on my home computer is worth 12.7 years of my life. In fact, since the maximum damages I could expect to pay for violating most EULAs are a few thousand dollars or less, reading a EULA is dumber than playing the lottery!
True,
But buying a company solely for its IP, stripping the company to the bone and firing all of its employees is a fairly common practice in business. (Although usually this is done with software or patent IP not music, which is readily licensed.)
Making the songs non assignable, protects the company you licensed them to. It also prevents your arch enemy from licensing your stuff by acquisition.
That's an easy one. After watching Snatch five times you're probably still trying to figure out what the hell Brad Pitt actually said.
But the obvious way that this will affect DVD movies is: HDTV.
One of the true tragedies of our modern day health care system is that it is exponentially cheaper to treat many diseases with drugs than with surgery. However, the government will pay for the surgery but not for drug therapy. In my opinion it is the governmental health support programs for the needy (medicare/medicaid) that are responsible for poor people going without drugs. Poor people couldn't afford AZT even from the cheapest generic drug supplier.
fact 1: The figure $12.50 is taken from the article itself. This is the real number. So before you start complaining about outrageous licensing fees maybe you should do a little bit of digging to see just how outrageous those fees actually are.
fact 2: Patents expire 17 years from date of issue or 20 years from date of filing. So 120 years is a bit silly.
Look, I could object to Aibo hacking on the grounds that somebody might develop an attack Aibo that will be programmed to roam the streets, ripping people throats out. But let's try to get a grip, shall we?
It could very well be a win win sitution, and not part of a zero-sum game.
It is already a win win situation. Patients pay a little bit of extra money. This money is sent to the research institutions with a proven success record. They in turn sink this money back into more research. It's a positive feedback loop. If you produce things that people need, you get paid more and most of that money goes back into the research.
Apparently your high school teachers never bothered to explain capitalism to you. Let me try.
Is your health important to you? That's a rhetorical question, of course it is. In a capitalist society industries that are important to us should make the most profit. If the pharmaceutical business did not make money, nobody would invest in it. No investment means no research, no innovation, no new products, no miracle cures. Is that what you want?
In a capitalistic society, companies that make useful products are supposed to be profitable. If they aren't then the whole system breaks down.
This sort of research should be publicly funded and controled.
Well, that would be socialism. Luckily I don't even have to argue with you there. If you want socialism, you're in the wrong country for it (assuming that you are American or from one of the many other capitalistic countries out there, my apologies if this is incorrect). You claim that pharmaceutical companies should be government controlled because they are so important. I say that my health is too important to hand it over to the government for control. I'd rather have those greedy scientists who think that they can make a quick buck by saving my life over a bunch of government bureaucrats.
Doctor: We need to run some tests to see if your unborn child has Canavan disease. You have your choice, the expensive test or the cheaper test.
Patient: What's the difference between the tests?
Doctor: They're the same test but with the expensive test we charge $12.50 extra and send that money to the people who discovered the genetic marker in the first place.
Patient: And if I choose the cheaper test?
Doctor: Then the people who did the original research get screwed. But hey, if they had wanted to recoup any of their investment in research they should have kept it a secret.
That's the real choice here. Do the people who did the original research get paid, or do they get screwed?
Providing TV guide information is just not something that anybody is interested in doing as a hobby. It's just data entry. No fun at all.
Incidentally, I think that TiVo should sell their guide info without linking it to the TiVo hardware. Rumor is that they don't make any money on the hardware anyway. So let independant programmers set up their own PVR with TiVo like scheduling software that ties in to TiVo's guide.
If TiVo's having trouble getting these things off the shelves, that's news to me. I could have been a bit more proactive about it and I'm sure that I could find a dozen places on the web with TiVos available. But they seem to be selling quite well in my neck of the woods.
**
First Post!!!!!! (Score:1)
by stu72 (stu@shelf.dyndns.org) on Thursday January 24, @04:45PM (#2934533)
(User #96650 Info | http://shelf.dyndns.org/~stu/)
What do I win?
(Your message is number 487 in this discussion. This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.)