At the end of the day, these movie/song clips are just basically adverts. Its the ultimate form of Viral Advertising and the studios should be encouraging it, not trying to control it.
They are encouraging it. But why shouldn't youtube pay for it like everyone else? Music videos bring in viewers which can be translated into revenue. Why should the music industry provide free revenue for youtube, MTV etc?
You can't have it both ways.
Actually they can, as it's their videos and they are free to release them for free or to charge for them as they wish. When you make a video you are free to do whatever the hell you want with it. But wait, that would mean work, it's much easier to sit on your arse whining at people who actually have initiative.
but MY generation will NOT pay major labels to promote THEIR albums.
Your 'generation' might not, but TV companies will, as people who are watching music videos can also be shown adverts which bring in revenue above the costs of the videos, thereby producing this thing called 'profit'.
This is a very simple concept, maybe your generation is too obsolete to understand how modern business works.
If Google goes down, I just open up another search engine, or type in addresses myself, or god forbid, just do without. If a water pipe bursts, I can't just hook my tap up to another one.
What other job would have you bust your ass for another 5 or 6 years with the possibility that you may be fired at the end of this ``probationary time'' for not exceeding vague standards?
In the real world, you bust your ass for 5 or 6 years, with the possibility that you may be fired at the end of it. Except there is no tenure whatsoever, and you can be fired any time in your career.
What happens when a family member takes ill or dies? What happens if you get sick? Or break your leg? Or (as I did a couple months ago) suffer a spontaneous lung collapse?
Then you pay $2.50 for the recording. Your tuition fee gets you access to the lecture, that's the university's only obligation to you. If you can't get there for whatever reason, that's your own problem.
My theory is that too many students are immature and expect to be coddled by the university like they have been their whole lives.
And just in case you're still sitting in judgment of college students' "laziness", consider the fact that many college students have classes six days a week, year round, from 8AM to 10PM, and on the off day they're doing homework.
There are people in the world working 6am till 12pm seven days a week in sweatshops and on third world farms, not sitting in a lecture hall playing Counterstrike, but back-breaking labour to feed their families. And they don't have a cushy, high-paying office job at the end of it, they're doing it for the rest of their lives.
Students should be grateful for the opportunities they have.
Yes, they ran Netscape 3.0 and Windows 95 just fine. Similar software today, however, is much better than it used-to be, which is why almost nobody uses that old software on their new computers.
Is the software really better? Compare the system requirements for Word XP to Word 95, and tell me how much extra functionality it really has. People upgraded from Windows 95 because it crashed so often, not because the newer versions had more functionality.
Elite may have been technically impressive, but the gameplay was abysmal. You spent 50% of your time spinning round in circles avoiding pirates, and the other 50% crashing into the spacestation.
The question was "not to shut out rivals in the security software market"
So what? I don't want an operating system to be released without necessary components just so some third-party can make money off me. There shouldn't be any need for third-party add-ons, as far as I'm concerned virus checkers and firewalls are basic functionality.
Next Google will be suing Microsoft to not include an email program so gmail can make more money.
Microsoft also ships its own text editor, console program, paint program, defragmenter, disk formatter, screensavers, web browser, and many other utilities. So what's wrong with basic security software?
Maybe if Linux becomes popular they should be forced to release it without iptables.
If the middle class people would just totally evacuate decaying cities such as Oakland and Newark, those cities will either have to give up and consider themselves a write off (which is where Oakland may already be) or they will have to clean up their acts to stop the loss and re-attract the middle class.
More than likely, they'd just become complete ghettos. How can you eradicate crime when the politicians are all limp-wristed liberals who are more concerned with feeling sorry for the criminals rather than punishing them?
$20 a year is actually quite a lot. If you consider that bands might release an album on average once every four years, and if they make $10 profit selling an album (very generous once you consider taxes, pressing, distribution, marketing, the store's cut etc), that's only $2.50 a year. Then say they go to a gig every five years at $20 each, minus the costs of putting on a gig, that's maybe $1 a year. So far we're at $3.50.
I caught my first episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit the other night
Ah, Penn and Teller, those renowned biotechnicians.
It painted a pretty good argument FOR GM food... to feed the millions who are otherwise dying because it's hard to get crops to grow in their parts of the world.
Of course, the poorest parts of the world are the main market for these foods patented by giant profit-hungry corporations. Maybe they can be grown in those fields that the US government pays farmers NOT to farm in.
Or perhaps Bayer and the like can cut a profit-sharing deal with the military juntas who run these starving countries.
Aren't the 'GM' crops really just an extension of grafting and selective breeding that has been going on for thousands of years?
Yes, that would be the viewpoint of someone who didn't have the slightest clue about biotechnology, or in fact biology or genetics at all. The sort of thing you'd hear on Oprah. Or Slashdot.
Is this true, or have Penn & Teller hoodwinked me?
No, light entertainment is the most reliable source for objective scientific information.
Bear in mind most of these crops are grown by profit-hungry corporations. They'll use these foods so they can put even MORE herbicides on so they can squeeze a bit more out of the yield.
We've had thousands of years (and millions of deaths due to poisoning, disease and malnutrition) to work out which naturally evolved foods are safe and which aren't, and humans have evolved to recognise and be repulsed by foods which are unsafe.
We don't have that advantage for artificially genetically modified food.
Also all the natural cosmic rays in the world aren't going to splice banana genes and fish genes.
The irony of course, is that over-politically-correct people like you actually inflame more racial tensions than you solve.
It's like that affirmative action business that is supposed to make things easier for minority ethnicities, but in reality actually causes resentment and anger between the races.
Slashdot Mirror
They are encouraging it. But why shouldn't youtube pay for it like everyone else? Music videos bring in viewers which can be translated into revenue. Why should the music industry provide free revenue for youtube, MTV etc?
Actually they can, as it's their videos and they are free to release them for free or to charge for them as they wish. When you make a video you are free to do whatever the hell you want with it. But wait, that would mean work, it's much easier to sit on your arse whining at people who actually have initiative.
Your 'generation' might not, but TV companies will, as people who are watching music videos can also be shown adverts which bring in revenue above the costs of the videos, thereby producing this thing called 'profit'.
This is a very simple concept, maybe your generation is too obsolete to understand how modern business works.
If Google goes down, I just open up another search engine, or type in addresses myself, or god forbid, just do without. If a water pipe bursts, I can't just hook my tap up to another one.
The popularity of World of Warcraft suggests the latter.
Then you'd better phone the army up and tell them not to make recruits do pressups, as those are no use in the battlefield.
Perhaps they have these interview tests to filter out the whiners who are too arrogant to prove their skills.
Is there any other purpose for a policeman's boot?
In the real world, you bust your ass for 5 or 6 years, with the possibility that you may be fired at the end of it. Except there is no tenure whatsoever, and you can be fired any time in your career.
Then you pay $2.50 for the recording. Your tuition fee gets you access to the lecture, that's the university's only obligation to you. If you can't get there for whatever reason, that's your own problem.
My theory is that too many students are immature and expect to be coddled by the university like they have been their whole lives.
There are people in the world working 6am till 12pm seven days a week in sweatshops and on third world farms, not sitting in a lecture hall playing Counterstrike, but back-breaking labour to feed their families. And they don't have a cushy, high-paying office job at the end of it, they're doing it for the rest of their lives.
Students should be grateful for the opportunities they have.
Is the software really better? Compare the system requirements for Word XP to Word 95, and tell me how much extra functionality it really has. People upgraded from Windows 95 because it crashed so often, not because the newer versions had more functionality.
Popular != good. Otherwise you're going to have to include the Sims in this list.
Let's see if world of warcraft is remembered in fifteen years, or if it's on the scrapheap with Everquest and Diablo.
And isn't it funny how the quoted number of subscribers on world of warcraft goes up by about a million every day?
Elite may have been technically impressive, but the gameplay was abysmal. You spent 50% of your time spinning round in circles avoiding pirates, and the other 50% crashing into the spacestation.
So what? I don't want an operating system to be released without necessary components just so some third-party can make money off me. There shouldn't be any need for third-party add-ons, as far as I'm concerned virus checkers and firewalls are basic functionality.
Next Google will be suing Microsoft to not include an email program so gmail can make more money.
Microsoft also ships its own text editor, console program, paint program, defragmenter, disk formatter, screensavers, web browser, and many other utilities. So what's wrong with basic security software?
Maybe if Linux becomes popular they should be forced to release it without iptables.
Airport Wi-Fi is a luxury service aimed at an affluent market. $10 is nothing to businessmen with a $1500 laptop.
Of course it's the answer. Unless you're suggesting that criminals who make other people's lives a misery should be left on the streets?
More than likely, they'd just become complete ghettos. How can you eradicate crime when the politicians are all limp-wristed liberals who are more concerned with feeling sorry for the criminals rather than punishing them?
And the Chinese will have bought all the popcorn and will try and sell it to you on ebay.
Of course, the artists had no problems accepting the cheque when they signed the deal with the record company.
$20 a year is actually quite a lot. If you consider that bands might release an album on average once every four years, and if they make $10 profit selling an album (very generous once you consider taxes, pressing, distribution, marketing, the store's cut etc), that's only $2.50 a year. Then say they go to a gig every five years at $20 each, minus the costs of putting on a gig, that's maybe $1 a year. So far we're at $3.50.
Ah, Penn and Teller, those renowned biotechnicians.
Of course, the poorest parts of the world are the main market for these foods patented by giant profit-hungry corporations. Maybe they can be grown in those fields that the US government pays farmers NOT to farm in.
Or perhaps Bayer and the like can cut a profit-sharing deal with the military juntas who run these starving countries.
Yes, that would be the viewpoint of someone who didn't have the slightest clue about biotechnology, or in fact biology or genetics at all. The sort of thing you'd hear on Oprah. Or Slashdot.
No, light entertainment is the most reliable source for objective scientific information.
Bear in mind most of these crops are grown by profit-hungry corporations. They'll use these foods so they can put even MORE herbicides on so they can squeeze a bit more out of the yield.
We've had thousands of years (and millions of deaths due to poisoning, disease and malnutrition) to work out which naturally evolved foods are safe and which aren't, and humans have evolved to recognise and be repulsed by foods which are unsafe.
We don't have that advantage for artificially genetically modified food.
Also all the natural cosmic rays in the world aren't going to splice banana genes and fish genes.
The irony of course, is that over-politically-correct people like you actually inflame more racial tensions than you solve.
It's like that affirmative action business that is supposed to make things easier for minority ethnicities, but in reality actually causes resentment and anger between the races.
There is plenty of gravitational force on the ISS. What else do you think is keeping it in orbit?
Last I looked, computer games came on DVDs as well.
Console gamers are interested in gameplay. PC freaks are interested in frames per second and very little else.