Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple planned it this way when they chose T-Mobile, O2, Orange and so on. Roaming within Europe is due to become a lot cheaper, so they may have set it up as a way to break the telco's hold much like they turned the tables on the music publishers with the iTunes Music Store...
You may be on to something - just look at how easy it is to replace the SIM card on the iPhone - no need for a replaceable battery just for that.
"In 1906, after the British introduced a new poll-tax, Zulus in South Africa killed two British officers. In response, the British declared a war against the Zulus. Gandhi actively encouraged the British to recruit Indians. He argued that Indians should support the war efforts in order to legitimize their claims to full citizenship. The British, however, refused to commission Indians as army officers."
Not even Ghandi lived in a black-and-white world like you do.
So you have a local source to make bricks, and no local source of lumber to speak of - logical conclusion: build wooden houses. Even if insulation wasn't an issue: WTF?
Of course the guy who cracked all 3 browsers really minced him - Miller just got the lucky first draw (and the fact that nobody found his exploit in over a year also helped).
The dispute with the registrar stems over a series of exposes last year by WikiLeaks on the BND--Germany's equiv of the CIA. Why the registrar picked this moment to "finalize" the dispute, no-one knows, but it's not hard to guess...
This moment? Maybe because the contract had run out over a week ago? How much longer should they have given the guys to "finalize" their move?
Sorry, I just don't think that makes sense. I get where you're trying to go with it, though. But people don't buy THE song, they buy a COPY of the song (or, depending on who you ask, a license to play the song). The thing you're supplying is a copy. Copies are unlimited.
The economic theories involving supply and demand are based on scarcity. Trying to apply them to a resource that isn't scarce is like trying to apply them to a market with infinite customers. The math just doesn't add up. The economic theories that apply here are more about pricing and volume, where the production of the goods is a minor factor.
None of that doesn't prevent companies from being stupid, though. They can do things that will result in them making less profit and it still doesn't disprove the economic theories.
So your argument is that people would just as gladly pay for another song, or in fact for random bits, because they actually pay for the copy, not the music. Maybe you should ask yourself why the music industry is rich, and you are not.
Yes, but surely you see the flip side to that coin? Charging more of a product decreases overall sales, especially when there is no large cost for greater "production" (in this case only bandwidth). Selling 100 units at a profit of $1 each makes you 5% less money selling 140 units at a profit of 75 cents each.
Sure, but when you sell 100 units @ $1 profit and then drop the price again, you'll only have to sell 7 to make more profit than if you didn't, and due to the price drop you may even get more people to buy the product than originally would have bought it at 75 cents profit.
And since you obviously think you are good at stats why haven't you answered my question? - Under your stated assumptions, what's the probability that Antarctica and/or Greenland is NOT losing ice?
While this question was not posed to me, I think I'll take a stab at it anyway.
I would say, "pretty damn good." Take THIS graph for example. It shows MORE ice in the southern hemisphere.
Which is the exact opposite of what THIS article states. So, the data doesn't back up the predictions. Strange. Maybe the predictions were wrong?
Then, there is THIS graph reporting the average temperatures in Antarctica. Hmmmm. It's going down? So, who is correct here; the predictions or the data? Are you one of these people who changes the data when it doesn't meet your expected results?
Gee, why am I not surprised that people who can't tell the difference between "global" and "local" also can't tell the difference between "arctic" and "antarctic" or, in fact "their ass" and "a hole in the ground".
NASA?
The same NASA that went 7 years without ever noticing a problem with their methodology that was detectable with an open source statistics package?
7 years? How could Nasa have missed "that 1934 and not 1998 was the hottest year in the US" for 7 years in 2007, when they said in 2001 that "1934 was the hottest year in the US"? Well, sorry, but before you criticize NASA, you should get your own numbers up to date.
Slashdot Mirror
Air Force One? Snakes? People trying to escape from New York? Plissken, let's forget you ever went to LA - we need you here!
Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple planned it this way when they chose T-Mobile, O2, Orange and so on. Roaming within Europe is due to become a lot cheaper, so they may have set it up as a way to break the telco's hold much like they turned the tables on the music publishers with the iTunes Music Store...
You may be on to something - just look at how easy it is to replace the SIM card on the iPhone - no need for a replaceable battery just for that.
Sure, whatever you say - because you are obviously the expert on being in denial.
This account is effectively anonymous.
But you assume I would? Projection.
No assumptions of any sort made. You are in denial.
"You forget to tick the "Post Anonymously" checkbox." Projection and denial.
Because we want a picture, not just a (few) pixels.
Why the fuck would I bother to post anonymously? This account is effectively anonymous.
But you assume I would? Projection.
I believe he would have thought you are a really tragic case.
You forget to tick the "Post Anonymously" checkbox.
Don't project your behavior on me.
The real question is: are the military funded applications sold through the Appstore?
Guess so BulletFlight is available in the AppStore for $29.99
Hey, once the TEA partitioners got the "no more tax" and "more defense" wishes, guess how the Armed Forced will finance itself?
You know, at least I have the balls to log in & admit I've made a stupid mistake.
Now you only have to admit to a couple of hundred others. No, wait - lies aren't mistakes, are they?
"In 1906, after the British introduced a new poll-tax, Zulus in South Africa killed two British officers. In response, the British declared a war against the Zulus. Gandhi actively encouraged the British to recruit Indians. He argued that Indians should support the war efforts in order to legitimize their claims to full citizenship. The British, however, refused to commission Indians as army officers."
Not even Ghandi lived in a black-and-white world like you do.
I think this is limited to distribution on 500 devices though.
No, it's for companies with 500 or more employees. You've got it confused with 100 devices for Ad Hoc distribution.
So you have a local source to make bricks, and no local source of lumber to speak of - logical conclusion: build wooden houses. Even if insulation wasn't an issue: WTF?
Of course the guy who cracked all 3 browsers really minced him - Miller just got the lucky first draw (and the fact that nobody found his exploit in over a year also helped).
Laugh all you want, but there are a lot of Mac users at Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos.
Are you implying that the US goverment is violating Apple's EULA?
Are you implying the US government is violating United States law?
The dispute with the registrar stems over a series of exposes last year by WikiLeaks on the BND--Germany's equiv of the CIA. Why the registrar picked this moment to "finalize" the dispute, no-one knows, but it's not hard to guess...
This moment? Maybe because the contract had run out over a week ago? How much longer should they have given the guys to "finalize" their move?
This April 20th, let us all raise our glasses in a hearty "Heil Hitler" and vow to complete his dream, his dream of a purer, cleaner, happier world.
You might wanna rethink that date, buddy.
So is your point that pot smokers are Nazis for celebrating on Hitler's birthday?
Or, as for most replies to the original story, see my Sig.
Sure, if you compare two songs, they're always going to be different, which is not so for bread.
Excuse me? Are you from the US by chance?
Well, if you don't like it, move to f*ing Canada - there you could buy the tune legally.
Sorry, I just don't think that makes sense. I get where you're trying to go with it, though. But people don't buy THE song, they buy a COPY of the song (or, depending on who you ask, a license to play the song). The thing you're supplying is a copy. Copies are unlimited.
The economic theories involving supply and demand are based on scarcity. Trying to apply them to a resource that isn't scarce is like trying to apply them to a market with infinite customers. The math just doesn't add up. The economic theories that apply here are more about pricing and volume, where the production of the goods is a minor factor.
None of that doesn't prevent companies from being stupid, though. They can do things that will result in them making less profit and it still doesn't disprove the economic theories.
So your argument is that people would just as gladly pay for another song, or in fact for random bits, because they actually pay for the copy, not the music. Maybe you should ask yourself why the music industry is rich, and you are not.
Yes, but surely you see the flip side to that coin? Charging more of a product decreases overall sales, especially when there is no large cost for greater "production" (in this case only bandwidth). Selling 100 units at a profit of $1 each makes you 5% less money selling 140 units at a profit of 75 cents each.
Sure, but when you sell 100 units @ $1 profit and then drop the price again, you'll only have to sell 7 to make more profit than if you didn't, and due to the price drop you may even get more people to buy the product than originally would have bought it at 75 cents profit.
I'd love to see a Guitar Hero made with songs that the RIAA didn't control.
Ermm, sorry, but the hits also drive the sales of GH, not only GH new sales of old music.
And since you obviously think you are good at stats why haven't you answered my question? - Under your stated assumptions, what's the probability that Antarctica and/or Greenland is NOT losing ice?
While this question was not posed to me, I think I'll take a stab at it anyway.
I would say, "pretty damn good." Take THIS graph for example. It shows MORE ice in the southern hemisphere.
Which is the exact opposite of what THIS article states. So, the data doesn't back up the predictions. Strange. Maybe the predictions were wrong?
Then, there is THIS graph reporting the average temperatures in Antarctica. Hmmmm. It's going down? So, who is correct here; the predictions or the data? Are you one of these people who changes the data when it doesn't meet your expected results?
Gee, why am I not surprised that people who can't tell the difference between "global" and "local" also can't tell the difference between "arctic" and "antarctic" or, in fact "their ass" and "a hole in the ground".
NASA? The same NASA that went 7 years without ever noticing a problem with their methodology that was detectable with an open source statistics package?
7 years? How could Nasa have missed "that 1934 and not 1998 was the hottest year in the US" for 7 years in 2007, when they said in 2001 that "1934 was the hottest year in the US"? Well, sorry, but before you criticize NASA, you should get your own numbers up to date.