I subscribe to a music service that keeps a history of my downloads. If they ever change formats, all I have to do is re-download my songs in the new format at no extra charge. I don't buy CDs any more, and my subscription is less than just one CD.
The Earth does not wobble; it precesses, which basically means there is more than one axis of rotation. The main rotation gives us day and night. The tilt of the main axis gives us summer and winter (as the earth is either on the left or right of the Sun). Secondary (and tertiary) rotational axes give us ice ages and global warming.
Wobbling implies a change in angular momentum, but as an object floating in space (with nothing to provide footing for an opposite and equal force), the earth's angular momentum does not change significantly (unless hit by a really, really big object).
All this will mean is that there will be fewer sources to link to. FARK and Google and other sites that post news links will only be able to link to providers who pay the AP fee, like Yahoo! (which already pays AP, Reuters and other license fees and won't be otherwise affected by this announcement). Instead of seeing "and 3,257 related" on Google News, you'll just see "and 2 related".
Does Google News index Yahoo! news stories? I can't remember if I've ever seen a Yahoo! news link on Google News. I wonder if Yahoo! has banned the Google newsbot. If so, Google will have even fewer sources to link to.
I've never understood why newspapers post their content online for free. I love that they do, but there had to come a day when the sustainability of losing money caught up with the newspapers.
Most questions here are tech related, but what about the business side of Real? Here's the question I'd ask:
Real doesn't seem to understand brand value (or at least doesn't seem to care about it). Their player went from RealPlayer to RealOne and now back to RealPlayer. Helix is a mishmash of community, DRM, and servers. There's no easy way to specify which Real product you're talking about at any given time. From a history of difficult-to-find links, to bloated software, to intrusive advertising, to lack of new innovations, to a run-silent PR strategy, brand equity in the Real name continues to reach new lows.
Real obviously does not understand branding. Does Real intend to learn here?
how could an international group possibly regulate message on the internet anyway?
Don't think like a tech-head. True it might technically be difficult to limit what someone posts on a chat room or web site.
But here's how it could more easily be regulated: Use the courts as a weapon! No incorporated company could stand up to government-sponsored (any government) lawsuits or threatened lawsuits. The company would pull info down as soon as it was identified, and be forced to implement filters for boards or sites they host.
Large companies who might be able to bankroll a legal defense still couldn't stand up to the bad PR that could be generated from publicizing "unacceptable" speech whose expression they somehow enable.
The US-version of almost unlimited free speech must be defended. I'd rather know if some level of hatred was about to boil over and nip it in the bud than be caught off guard when it did erupt into violence!
Copyrights, originally meant to give authors a temporary monopoly on their works, have essentially evolved into property rights as governments allow them to be repeatedly extended.
When I was in school, we had to pay up to $150 per book for some classes. We couldn't (legally) photocopy someone else's entire book, or use full copies on the Internet. We had to pay for the book...
Why not do the same thing for music coursework? Everyone would be required to buy the 50 songs listed for the course. At 99 cents each, that's about the same price as a book.
Alternatively, the professor could legally post 30-second samples of each song. Though not optimal, s/he could at least pick sections of each song (say key chords, or hook lines) that portrayed why it was important to the history of Rock and Roll.
But what if you like the LP? What if you prefer that beautiful, organic music sound with huge cover art, liner notes big enough to actually read, and printed media you and your friends can spread all over your bedroom floor while listening?
This sounds like an interesting twist on the Tragedy of the Commons problem: those who benefit from a free (or cheap) resource will try to accrue all its benefits to themselves, either denying that resource to others, or destroying the resource, or both.
From Hyperphrase's motion to strike the summary judgment motion as untimely:
Counsel used bolded italics to make their point, a clear sign of grievous iniquity by one's foe.
AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T COMPAIN IN ALL CAPS!!!!! THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE JUDGE'S ATTENTION!!!!
The Economist had a good editorial earlier this year recommending we go back to the original 14-year copyright, renewable once (for 28 years total maximum.)
From the editorial:
Copyright was originally the grant of a temporary government-supported monopoly on copying a work, not a property right. Its sole purpose was to encourage the circulation of ideas by giving creators and publishers a short-term incentive to disseminate their work.
First let me say I am a major anti-tax person. Taxes should not be a way for government just to grab money whenever money's present. Taxes need to be rational.
That said, I have less problem with paying taxes that actually go to improving the delivery or quality or route to whatever it is being taxed.
For example, it could be argued that sales taxes I pay on book purchases in a physical stores help the state or locality maintain the streets I use to get to the book store, and maintain a business-friendly beaurocracy that help make it easier for the bookstore to locate near where I live.
So if the states can prove that the taxes they collect for on-line purchases somehow help my state or locality enhance my online service, then fine. However, I don't see how my locality helps me with the bandwidth I buy from a company based in another state, or with the purchase I made from a company based in another state. What value do I get for paying that tax?
First let me say I am a major anti-tax person. Taxes should not be a way for government just to grab money whenever money's present. Taxes need to be rational.
That said, I have less problem with paying taxes that actually go to improving the delivery or quality or route to whatever it is being taxed.
For example, it could be argued that sales taxes I pay on book purchases in a physical stores help the state or locality maintain the streets I use to get to the book store, and maintain a business-friendly beaurocracy that help make it easier for the bookstore to locate near where I live.
So if the states can prove that the taxes they collect for on-line purchases somehow help my state or locality enhance my online service, then fine. However, I don't see how my locality helps me with the bandwidth I buy from a company based in another state, or with the purchase I made from a company based in another state. What value do I get for paying that tax?
The toughest thing about naming every speices will be finding every species to test and name.
Here's my proposal for a brute force method for finding every species: create every possible DNA combination in a lab, inject the DNA into a plant seed or an animal egg and see if it grows into something.
If it grows, name it. If it doesn't grow, rule it out as a species.
I agree that this is a great idea and can be commercialized almost instantly, but for more than a self-service bar:
* A few of these placed at restaurant/bar wait stations would speed up the waitron process - they no longer have to wait in the queue at the service bar.
* Drinks will be of uniform quality (this is either a good or bad feature...)
However, in London pubs, mixed drinks are metered out at 25cl per glass - no human judgement. This produces awful drinks! I fear an automated bartender would produce similarly awful drinks.
The algorithm could be reduced to one PAL - that way you can dispense with the PHD sysadmin that would otherwise be required behind the bar!
It's even configurable - the owner could specify what's in each slot, and the bar could determine which drinks it can make from those ingredients.
I've long wanted to get a group of like-minded farmers organized to plant their circularly-watered fields in a dot-matrix pattern so we could spell out stuff to communitcate with aliens.
I sorta liked the 1st hour of last nite's episode, but it ran past bed time (yes, I have a day job!) so I couldn't watch the whole thing. I wish they had made this into a regular season with one 1-hour show per week, rather than this 'drinking from the fire hose' schedule.
...the effect of that has been a frightening increase in the amount...
Unfortunately this is true. I used to work for a company that sends millions of e-mails each week. Response (by any measure: opens, clicks, sales) was falling. Over a two-year period, I made recommendations to improve the value of each e-mail, but nobody believed any ROIs I presented. They were not willing to invest in tools to improve response, and would not commit internal resources to improving response.
So what happened was we were made to send more of the same, more often, to meet artificially higher and higher short-term revenue goals. I quit the company.
Slashdot Mirror
I subscribe to a music service that keeps a history of my downloads. If they ever change formats, all I have to do is re-download my songs in the new format at no extra charge. I don't buy CDs any more, and my subscription is less than just one CD.
The Earth does not wobble; it precesses, which basically means there is more than one axis of rotation. The main rotation gives us day and night. The tilt of the main axis gives us summer and winter (as the earth is either on the left or right of the Sun). Secondary (and tertiary) rotational axes give us ice ages and global warming.
Here's some more information on precession:
http://www.crystalinks.com/precession.html
Wobbling implies a change in angular momentum, but as an object floating in space (with nothing to provide footing for an opposite and equal force), the earth's angular momentum does not change significantly (unless hit by a really, really big object).
You have no guarantee you can play your CDs 5 years from now either. If one gets scratched or broken, you have to buy it again.
All this will mean is that there will be fewer sources to link to. FARK and Google and other sites that post news links will only be able to link to providers who pay the AP fee, like Yahoo! (which already pays AP, Reuters and other license fees and won't be otherwise affected by this announcement). Instead of seeing "and 3,257 related" on Google News, you'll just see "and 2 related".
Does Google News index Yahoo! news stories? I can't remember if I've ever seen a Yahoo! news link on Google News. I wonder if Yahoo! has banned the Google newsbot. If so, Google will have even fewer sources to link to.
I've never understood why newspapers post their content online for free. I love that they do, but there had to come a day when the sustainability of losing money caught up with the newspapers.
Every tire you've ever bought or has come with a car you drove was sold unbalanced. How is that different from people buying untested DRAMs?
Most questions here are tech related, but what about the business side of Real? Here's the question I'd ask:
Real doesn't seem to understand brand value (or at least doesn't seem to care about it). Their player went from RealPlayer to RealOne and now back to RealPlayer. Helix is a mishmash of community, DRM, and servers. There's no easy way to specify which Real product you're talking about at any given time. From a history of difficult-to-find links, to bloated software, to intrusive advertising, to lack of new innovations, to a run-silent PR strategy, brand equity in the Real name continues to reach new lows.
Real obviously does not understand branding. Does Real intend to learn here?
Don't think like a tech-head. True it might technically be difficult to limit what someone posts on a chat room or web site.
But here's how it could more easily be regulated: Use the courts as a weapon! No incorporated company could stand up to government-sponsored (any government) lawsuits or threatened lawsuits. The company would pull info down as soon as it was identified, and be forced to implement filters for boards or sites they host.
Large companies who might be able to bankroll a legal defense still couldn't stand up to the bad PR that could be generated from publicizing "unacceptable" speech whose expression they somehow enable.
The US-version of almost unlimited free speech must be defended. I'd rather know if some level of hatred was about to boil over and nip it in the bud than be caught off guard when it did erupt into violence!
Past post on similar topic: Back to basics on copyright laws!
Why not do the same thing for music coursework? Everyone would be required to buy the 50 songs listed for the course. At 99 cents each, that's about the same price as a book.
Alternatively, the professor could legally post 30-second samples of each song. Though not optimal, s/he could at least pick sections of each song (say key chords, or hook lines) that portrayed why it was important to the history of Rock and Roll.
I don't get it. Why not just buy advertising on the radio station you want to target?
A friend during the Internet bubble years referred to the web as "revenge of the nerds." The Guardian finally picks up on that meme.
But what if you like the LP? What if you prefer that beautiful, organic music sound with huge cover art, liner notes big enough to actually read, and printed media you and your friends can spread all over your bedroom floor while listening?
This sounds like an interesting twist on the Tragedy of the Commons problem: those who benefit from a free (or cheap) resource will try to accrue all its benefits to themselves, either denying that resource to others, or destroying the resource, or both.
From Hyperphrase's motion to strike the summary judgment motion as untimely: Counsel used bolded italics to make their point, a clear sign of grievous iniquity by one's foe. AT LEAST THEY DIDN'T COMPAIN IN ALL CAPS!!!!! THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE JUDGE'S ATTENTION!!!!
From the editorial:
When I was a kid, all we had were ones and zeroes. We'd have been happy just to have spaces and tabs!
I think you missued my whole point. I'm anti-tax when those taxes are not rational.
First let me say I am a major anti-tax person. Taxes should not be a way for government just to grab money whenever money's present. Taxes need to be rational.
That said, I have less problem with paying taxes that actually go to improving the delivery or quality or route to whatever it is being taxed.
For example, it could be argued that sales taxes I pay on book purchases in a physical stores help the state or locality maintain the streets I use to get to the book store, and maintain a business-friendly beaurocracy that help make it easier for the bookstore to locate near where I live.
So if the states can prove that the taxes they collect for on-line purchases somehow help my state or locality enhance my online service, then fine. However, I don't see how my locality helps me with the bandwidth I buy from a company based in another state, or with the purchase I made from a company based in another state. What value do I get for paying that tax?
First let me say I am a major anti-tax person. Taxes should not be a way for government just to grab money whenever money's present. Taxes need to be rational.
That said, I have less problem with paying taxes that actually go to improving the delivery or quality or route to whatever it is being taxed.
For example, it could be argued that sales taxes I pay on book purchases in a physical stores help the state or locality maintain the streets I use to get to the book store, and maintain a business-friendly beaurocracy that help make it easier for the bookstore to locate near where I live.
So if the states can prove that the taxes they collect for on-line purchases somehow help my state or locality enhance my online service, then fine. However, I don't see how my locality helps me with the bandwidth I buy from a company based in another state, or with the purchase I made from a company based in another state. What value do I get for paying that tax?
The toughest thing about naming every speices will be finding every species to test and name. Here's my proposal for a brute force method for finding every species: create every possible DNA combination in a lab, inject the DNA into a plant seed or an animal egg and see if it grows into something. If it grows, name it. If it doesn't grow, rule it out as a species.
I agree that this is a great idea and can be commercialized almost instantly, but for more than a self-service bar:
* A few of these placed at restaurant/bar wait stations would speed up the waitron process - they no longer have to wait in the queue at the service bar.
* Drinks will be of uniform quality (this is either a good or bad feature...)
However, in London pubs, mixed drinks are metered out at 25cl per glass - no human judgement. This produces awful drinks! I fear an automated bartender would produce similarly awful drinks.
The algorithm could be reduced to one PAL - that way you can dispense with the PHD sysadmin that would otherwise be required behind the bar!
It's even configurable - the owner could specify what's in each slot, and the bar could determine which drinks it can make from those ingredients.
I've long wanted to get a group of like-minded farmers organized to plant their circularly-watered fields in a dot-matrix pattern so we could spell out stuff to communitcate with aliens.
I sorta liked the 1st hour of last nite's episode, but it ran past bed time (yes, I have a day job!) so I couldn't watch the whole thing. I wish they had made this into a regular season with one 1-hour show per week, rather than this 'drinking from the fire hose' schedule.
Unfortunately this is true. I used to work for a company that sends millions of e-mails each week. Response (by any measure: opens, clicks, sales) was falling. Over a two-year period, I made recommendations to improve the value of each e-mail, but nobody believed any ROIs I presented. They were not willing to invest in tools to improve response, and would not commit internal resources to improving response.
So what happened was we were made to send more of the same, more often, to meet artificially higher and higher short-term revenue goals. I quit the company.