I had some issues with saying that, but I still felt like I could say that...
I come from an environment that disses marketers... I was trying to cheapen both the insight(I was also thinking engineering/technical know how/designing... knowing how to do the production) and the marketing.
Its funny because I have tried to show engineers etc the value of marketing...
Note: I also think that Open Source etc will make its own marketing happen... Its all relaited.
If it wern't for the advertisers that mail stuff(I get lots of junk mail and would be happy to pay more for letters), we'd have cheaper textbooks etc and products, and I'd be using email!
Arg, I didn't draft out this responce as well as I could have... but in the intrest of time, I move on. Also, the marketing comment was minor to the point... It could have been left off, but thanks for the rebuttle.
If I can't time shift media, and or have a physical area in witch all of the data is mine to do with as I please (including transfer to somebody elses physical possession)...
I would not be able to have free thought, and would fight to protect myself from tyranny.
I don't want to fight--I think we can compete with the tirants by by producing our own networks to distribute information. The problems arrive when somebody claims a fundimental aspect of life as their intelectual property.
I believe that if one made a design that is adopted as a normal part of life, we should compensate that person. As soon as it is required to do so, I will withdraw my support of it, and seek alternatives.
Lets pay people for their work, insight is cheap, marketing is cheap... working them together + other aspects is tough.
Don't be afraid to pay someone well for doing a good job... but then what happens when that person is already well compensated?
Possibly invest(give a gift) to that person to create more works...
Possibly give money to somebody else. How do we know if somebody is already well compensated?... Good accounting... how do we get good accounting... voluntary loss of lots of privacy... Isn't that bad?... yes... but... If our privacy is lost to everybody instead of the big brothers, it will take away the advantage from big brother.
I have heard about diamonds being able to cut glass... I've never actually seen it though.
I would by my wife/gfriend a diamond... ONLY if it were able to be used in a laser type thing (I don't know how they get used in lasers... probably don't) or a super tool that requires use of diamond to make it super... (a cutter etc).. My leatherman had diamonds on it...
I just wouldn't want her to hurt herself with it... or me...
I've been working on a one handed keyboard that uses hat switches..., fits arround a PDA, and uses an IBM or Toshiba style pointing stick where the thumb is.
The hat switches can fit on the other side of the knuckle, and can be moved in many directions.
(think serations of a knife with hat switches in the dips) the points will protect the keys.
The hat switches are very short.
you can either look at the PDA or not to type. you can use the thumb on the same hand to control a mouse.
I've been thinking about this for a year or so... I don't wish to patent it, however I do wish to see it come about... and want to attack anybody else who pattents it.
You may barrow this design as long as you do not claim exlcusive rights to make it. 509 332 7697 is my phone number.
I hate missuse of patents, so lets make a prior art database to keep things free! (or tell me about one that has already started)
I am considering releasing a project that encourages forking... infact every patch or new version will be viewed as a fork.
With my project, I will have my endorsement as founder to give to a tree (or more). I would try to merge trees, and give them their own fork.
We don't have (or possibly have but shouldn't have) control over what other people need. Everybody should have control over their own system, and allow others to benefit from their system enhansements.
Basically, accept everything, (if you hate a patch don't do work to implement it, let somebody else implement it) and endorse only the best.
Your mission plan might change if you see what other people need.
It should be illegal for ISPs to restrict what you do over the line. They should be protected from lawsuits for the content... and so should we if we choose to resell.
Telephone companies are not liable for what people say over their lines. (I think... and hope) The internet is similar.
I am trying to read the constitution again... I hope there is somethign that makes it unconstitutional to act like that, also hopefully there is at least a law that makes it illegal to have crappy TOS(terms of service) and not have the liability that promotes bad TOS.
Reselling it should make you be an ISP, and that should (maybe: is) allowed
Trading freedom for protection is a major theme in 1984.
Technology will progress, it grows because of freedom(ability to suppress or promote others) (ripe when everybody(well, an optimum percentager of parties) has control of themselves, and can challege eachother. It grows rotten when everybody is synchronous) It grows because of war.
The trick(for the opressors) is to keep the technology growing past its ripeness. And now we are at the mercy of the technology that few control. The cable companies, the telecos, the FCC, Microsoft, Other tech companies with "Intelectual Property".
Oceana was at war with... Eastasia?... no... Eurasia... no... Eastasia...
America is at war with Taliban... no?... Iraq... no, yes? Wait, why not just cloak it in a word... terror. Yes, we are at war with terror... who is terror? umm... taliban one day, Osama Bin Laden another day... The people who blew up the WTC...
The use of the word "terror" allows us no not go back and change the history.
I think we should have peer to peer authentication. Each person will be their own central certification system, and certify friends and family to use their ID. This would form a large network. That should be traceable.
I am the only central identification system for myself. NO piece of paper or bits represents me officially. No signatures, no pictures, no retnal scans, no fingerprints.
I personally like to have multiple usernames and passwords with varing security.
I give out my password to things that I view as public (My hotmail account is public... and now The stupid people at microsoft have made it my "Passport")
I tell my friends my root password on my toy machines,
I tell select individuals the password to public servers
For "Secure" sites, I will seal the password in an envelope and put it in a safe deposit box
For Super Secure sites, I would do more.
I give passwords to my friends for subscriptions to online content. If I buy so many credits, I should be able to give them to somebody else.
So:I guess what I am saying is:
We need an Identity Tunneling system, where I can authorize my friends to act in my name... and so then... I would be the central identity server For myself...
Oh wait... If we let microsoft be the identity server, wouldn't microsoft etc be liable for all actions done on our account? If that is the case, Yippie, Create a username and password for me... We will be acting under the central authentication networks name!
Is it just that it doesn't have MS in front of it?
Is it because it has the word "Liberty" in it?
Both have words relaiting to freedom: Pass and Liberty. Both have little to do with freedom.
Absoultue Annonominity or Full Disclosure must be present for freedom. If there is a monitoring agency that can restrict what it sees to itself, it is inherently flawed.
It must fully disclose everything, to everyone... And that is non trivial... But probably worth pursuing.
Untill then, We should not have a self accountable agency like these systems that base decisions on limited, selected for cheapness/support viewpoint information.
I propose that everyone give everyone else their MS passport passwords etc... make copies of fingerprints and retnas etc, and distribute them freely (An idea similar to one that Richard Stallman has promoted)
What makes this better than passport?
Is it just that it doesn't have MS in front of it?
Is it because it has the word "Liberty" in it?
Both have words relaiting to freedom: Pass and Liberty.
Both have little to do with freedom.
Absoultue Annonominity or Full Disclosure must be present for freedom.
If there is a monitoring agency that can restrict what it sees to itself, it is inherently flawed. It must fully disclose everything, to everyone...
And that is non trivial... But probably worth pursuing. Untill then, We should not have a self accountable agency like these systems that base decisions on limited, selected for cheapness/support viewpoint information.
I propose that everyone give everyone else their MS passport passwords etc... make copies of fingerprints and retnas etc, and distribute them freely (An idea similar to one that Richard Stallman has promoted)
Something that I would like to see
partial packets
(an audio stream is broken into two or more streams that both sound OK, and combine to make a good sounding single sound stream.
This would allow for a person to rely on multiple hosts instead of just one. (hopefully this could be broken into maybe even 6 streams)
This reminds me of Ogg Vorbis.. (break off the back of the packet and keep sound comming).. but it is a bit more complicated than that.
So, If I have a high bandwidth server, I could have 6 sources for my audio... each one would work partially independently: They could be made to overlap slightly to discourage purposefull bad packet introduction.
6 8bit streams... or 7 or 8... or more...
So, your browser would try to get the stuff from as many providers as possible.
You would serve the packets that others are lacking.
BTW, how does this system currently handle latency?
We need to make sure that the ISP's are not liable for what the users do. They should be treated like Telcos.. And everything that goes over it as free speach. Yes, even if it is nuclear bomb plans or terrorist orders, Or the latest Briteny Spears fakes. Because, what we do routinely can be viewed as just as serious and negative by others.
The government should not be allowed to read our email in secret. If they want to read our email... it needs to be fully public.
Privacy is there to protect freedom... Full Disclosure and openness also protect freedom.
Some manipulated composures of secrecy and openness can destroy our freedom. It can allow a group of people to use overwhelming force on a person or group to squash their idea. To divide and conquer.
I'm passionate about releasing my information to encourage others to release thiers, so that we can withstand the terrorist tactics of people who have poor products(fruit) and feel that they must protect their system instead of adapt.
We should have a block list.. (in existance) then an allow list to cover errors to the block list, then another block list, then another allow list... and on and on..
The idea is that everyone will appeal the denial list, but then the people who do spam will be put back on it really quickly.
Wareze are programs witch you can't get because production and support has stopped... so your able to get them.
Oh wait... You can't get an $18,000 program that you plan to use just to learn for the fun of it.. or educate yourself WITHOUT TECH SUPPORT.
I personally feel that Open Source should be a policy... No more Accounting foofes, no more control of the system by non elected officials(elected people are people you directly choose to fund... with time, respect, and or cash)
I wonder how hard it was to gather 40 armed stupid people to storm that guys house?
I wonder how hard they looked for a passive individual who they could make say "I felt like I was a murderer" or something like that... to make an example of?
Has anybody placed a law enforcement person under citizens arrest for violation of civil rights? Or the procecuter?
I understand that compatability is good for migration...
I've heard the most bad things about BIOS and bus, and other aspects... not just the x86 processors...
When will it be worthwhile to start getting rid of the not used stuff?
Are they keeping the short word instructions doing what they did, or are they making them do more usefull stuff...
(I suppose you could have a single instruction perform multiple operations... one that is old spec and one that is new spec.
Maybe I am considering something to be a problem that isn't... but as the instruction set increases, don't we have to have more bits to to describe the instruction?... Now I am realising that memory addressing is the big benefit for larger... bus width?
Also, how much faster are natively compiled for transmeta applications than those that go through the instruction conversion caching? (I think thats a way of putting it)
Thank you for your discourse, I am attempting to learn stuff from this conversation. </cow>
I've heard lots of bad stuff about the x86 architecture...
hacks upon hacks...
Do any of these new 64 bit processors offer a way out?
Is backward compatability with 8086, 286, 386 (sx and dx), 486(sx and dx), 586, 686 now trivial, or solved with a (long term low significance cost to benifit ratio)?
</flame>
And get sick of having to wade through all kinds of foofy stuff put up by web devlopers that tell their clients that they need the fancy graphics and flash animatin etc! (when they really want money and false dependance)
HTML is a meta data language for a reason. I like layout control, but the meta data, and end user configuration comes first.
Mod the first person shooter into less violent
on
Games in High School?
·
· Score: 1
You can change many first person shooters to be less violent.
Chex cereal released a quake or a doom mod, where you shoot a teleporter beam at monsters who wanted to eat your cereal.
Change the weapons and the blood and gore Look.
My mom was not happy with the look of quake, but if it were changed into throwing bibles at the devil she might let it go.
We start an open source competitor, and make it more profitable than they are.
This competitor can beg for donations... and work to assimilate other projects (like MS) and put them under open content licences(not like MS), and ask for more donations.
This company can also provide certification/support for these products/sell individual developer time/bid.
If we provide a better product, people are likely to be willing to pay more for it.
Money will go where it is needed. (maybe those outlook replacement people, and the hurd kernel)
Out grow MS. (profit gets channeled back into the company) With some of the money, buy community projects that are owned by the community.
http://www.openproliferation.org
Different types of movies, not competition
on
The Empire Stumbles
·
· Score: 1
Why all this S movie is better than that S movie talk. It doesn't matter. We spent money on both of them.
Besides making money:
Starwars to me is about: makebelieve galactic history, special effects/ hardware pushing. Its really neat that this movie shows a manufactured chrisis to to create addiction to weapon suppliers... This type thing is quite real.
Spiderman seems to about: personal history.. I'm guessing that there will be more movies... this was episode 1. It uses the hardware instead of creating it. This movie show us about chaos effect... being bad/ not caring may not have direct consequences... but it will get back to you.
Both stories needed to be told. Both stories could have charged me a bit less money.. (been released on fewer screens to lower costs)
Slashdot Mirror
... ok ...
so you say marketing is not cheap...
I had some issues with saying that, but I still felt like I could say that...
I come from an environment that disses marketers... I was trying to cheapen both the insight(I was also thinking engineering/technical know how/designing... knowing how to do the production) and the marketing.
Its funny because I have tried to show engineers etc the value of marketing...
Note: I also think that Open Source etc will make its own marketing happen... Its all relaited.
If it wern't for the advertisers that mail stuff(I get lots of junk mail and would be happy to pay more for letters), we'd have cheaper textbooks etc and products, and I'd be using email!
Arg, I didn't draft out this responce as well as I could have... but in the intrest of time, I move on. Also, the marketing comment was minor to the point... It could have been left off, but thanks for the rebuttle.
If I can't time shift media, and or have a physical area in witch all of the data is mine to do with as I please (including transfer to somebody elses physical possession)...
... yes... but... If our privacy is lost to everybody instead of the big brothers, it will take away the advantage from big brother.
I would not be able to have free thought, and would fight to protect myself from tyranny.
I don't want to fight--I think we can compete with the tirants by by producing our own networks to distribute information. The problems arrive when somebody claims a fundimental aspect of life as their intelectual property.
I believe that if one made a design that is adopted as a normal part of life, we should compensate that person. As soon as it is required to do so, I will withdraw my support of it, and seek alternatives.
Lets pay people for their work, insight is cheap, marketing is cheap... working them together + other aspects is tough.
Don't be afraid to pay someone well for doing a good job... but then what happens when that person is already well compensated?
Possibly invest(give a gift) to that person to create more works...
Possibly give money to somebody else.
How do we know if somebody is already well compensated?... Good accounting...
how do we get good accounting... voluntary loss of lots of privacy...
Isn't that bad?
I'd like your comments,
alpeterson@wsu.edu
I have heard about diamonds being able to cut glass... I've never actually seen it though.
.. My leatherman had diamonds on it...
I would by my wife/gfriend a diamond... ONLY if it were able to be used in a laser type thing (I don't know how they get used in lasers... probably don't) or a super tool that requires use of diamond to make it super... (a cutter etc)
I just wouldn't want her to hurt herself with it... or me...
Now I just need to get a girlfriend...
Hello,
I've been working on a one handed keyboard that uses hat switches..., fits arround a PDA, and uses an IBM or Toshiba style pointing stick where the thumb is.
The hat switches can fit on the other side of the knuckle, and can be moved in many directions.
(think serations of a knife with hat switches in the dips)
the points will protect the keys.
The hat switches are very short.
you can either look at the PDA or not to type.
you can use the thumb on the same hand to control a mouse.
I've been thinking about this for a year or so...
I don't wish to patent it, however I do wish to see it come about... and want to attack anybody else who pattents it.
You may barrow this design as long as you do not claim exlcusive rights to make it.
509 332 7697 is my phone number.
I hate missuse of patents, so lets make a prior art database to keep things free! (or tell me about one that has already started)
I am considering releasing a project that encourages forking... infact every patch or new version will be viewed as a fork.
With my project, I will have my endorsement as founder to give to a tree (or more). I would try to merge trees, and give them their own fork.
We don't have (or possibly have but shouldn't have) control over what other people need. Everybody should have control over their own system, and allow others to benefit from their system enhansements.
Basically, accept everything, (if you hate a patch don't do work to implement it, let somebody else implement it) and endorse only the best.
Your mission plan might change if you see what other people need.
Mission plans are tools, not gods.
It should be illegal for ISPs to restrict what you do over the line. They should be protected from lawsuits for the content... and so should we if we choose to resell.
Telephone companies are not liable for what people say over their lines. (I think... and hope) The internet is similar.
I am trying to read the constitution again... I hope there is somethign that makes it unconstitutional to act like that, also hopefully there is at least a law that makes it illegal to have crappy TOS(terms of service) and not have the liability that promotes bad TOS.
Reselling it should make you be an ISP, and that should (maybe: is) allowed
I don't know if Cygwin opens other security holes in windows. Haven't heard anything about it.
It has Apache, MySQL, Postgres...
XFree86... bunch of stuff.
www.cygwin.com
What can we do to support this?
I can think of:
Send him money... but where?
Offer to testify... (he might get flooded with offers)
Picket, ralley, boycott...
Revolt... (protect and honor our contract with other americans...the constitution)
Write legislature...
Write media...
Any ideas how to do these things?
Trading freedom for protection is a major theme in 1984.
... Iraq... no, yes? Wait, why not just cloak it in a word... terror. Yes, we are at war with terror... who is terror? umm... taliban one day, Osama Bin Laden another day... The people who blew up the WTC...
Technology will progress, it grows because of freedom(ability to suppress or promote others) (ripe when everybody(well, an optimum percentager of parties) has control of themselves, and can challege eachother. It grows rotten when everybody is synchronous) It grows because of war.
The trick(for the opressors) is to keep the technology growing past its ripeness. And now we are at the mercy of the technology that few control. The cable companies, the telecos, the FCC, Microsoft, Other tech companies with "Intelectual Property".
Oceana was at war with... Eastasia?... no... Eurasia... no... Eastasia...
America is at war with Taliban... no?
The use of the word "terror" allows us no not go back and change the history.
1984 is happening. And we love Big Brother.
One ID string would be nifty per person.
I think we should have peer to peer authentication. Each person will be their own central certification system, and certify friends and family to use their ID. This would form a large network. That should be traceable.
I am the only central identification system for myself. NO piece of paper or bits represents me officially. No signatures, no pictures, no retnal scans, no fingerprints.
I personally like to have multiple usernames and passwords with varing security.
I give out my password to things that I view as public (My hotmail account is public... and now The stupid people at microsoft have made it my "Passport")
I tell my friends my root password on my toy machines,
I tell select individuals the password to public servers
For "Secure" sites, I will seal the password in an envelope and put it in a safe deposit box
For Super Secure sites, I would do more.
I give passwords to my friends for subscriptions to online content. If I buy so many credits, I should be able to give them to somebody else.
So:I guess what I am saying is:
We need an Identity Tunneling system, where I can authorize my friends to act in my name... and so then... I would be the central identity server For myself...
Oh wait... If we let microsoft be the identity server, wouldn't microsoft etc be liable for all actions done on our account? If that is the case, Yippie, Create a username and password for me... We will be acting under the central authentication networks name!
What makes this better than passport?
Is it just that it doesn't have MS in front of it?
Is it because it has the word "Liberty" in it?
Both have words relaiting to freedom: Pass and Liberty. Both have little to do with freedom.
Absoultue Annonominity or Full Disclosure must be present for freedom. If there is a monitoring agency that can restrict what it sees to itself, it is inherently flawed.
It must fully disclose everything, to everyone... And that is non trivial... But probably worth pursuing.
Untill then, We should not have a self accountable agency like these systems that base decisions on limited, selected for cheapness/support viewpoint information.
I propose that everyone give everyone else their MS passport passwords etc... make copies of fingerprints and retnas etc, and distribute them freely (An idea similar to one that Richard Stallman has promoted)
What makes this better than passport? Is it just that it doesn't have MS in front of it? Is it because it has the word "Liberty" in it? Both have words relaiting to freedom: Pass and Liberty. Both have little to do with freedom. Absoultue Annonominity or Full Disclosure must be present for freedom. If there is a monitoring agency that can restrict what it sees to itself, it is inherently flawed. It must fully disclose everything, to everyone... And that is non trivial... But probably worth pursuing. Untill then, We should not have a self accountable agency like these systems that base decisions on limited, selected for cheapness/support viewpoint information. I propose that everyone give everyone else their MS passport passwords etc... make copies of fingerprints and retnas etc, and distribute them freely (An idea similar to one that Richard Stallman has promoted)
Something that I would like to see partial packets (an audio stream is broken into two or more streams that both sound OK, and combine to make a good sounding single sound stream. This would allow for a person to rely on multiple hosts instead of just one. (hopefully this could be broken into maybe even 6 streams) This reminds me of Ogg Vorbis.. (break off the back of the packet and keep sound comming).. but it is a bit more complicated than that. So, If I have a high bandwidth server, I could have 6 sources for my audio... each one would work partially independently: They could be made to overlap slightly to discourage purposefull bad packet introduction. 6 8bit streams... or 7 or 8... or more... So, your browser would try to get the stuff from as many providers as possible. You would serve the packets that others are lacking. BTW, how does this system currently handle latency?
Does anybody know of a web site that compares these?
(I'm basically trying to move the conversation away from the 1st post mess that was)
The ISP's just relay our trafic.
We need to make sure that the ISP's are not liable for what the users do. They should be treated like Telcos.. And everything that goes over it as free speach. Yes, even if it is nuclear bomb plans or terrorist orders, Or the latest Briteny Spears fakes. Because, what we do routinely can be viewed as just as serious and negative by others.
The government should not be allowed to read our email in secret. If they want to read our email... it needs to be fully public.
Privacy is there to protect freedom... Full Disclosure and openness also protect freedom.
Some manipulated composures of secrecy and openness can destroy our freedom. It can allow a group of people to use overwhelming force on a person or group to squash their idea. To divide and conquer.
I'm passionate about releasing my information to encourage others to release thiers, so that we can withstand the terrorist tactics of people who have poor products(fruit) and feel that they must protect their system instead of adapt.
-GRrrrRRrrr
What are IBMs web sphere's competetors?
We should have a block list.. (in existance)
then an allow list to cover errors to the block list, then another block list, then another allow list... and on and on..
The idea is that everyone will appeal the denial list, but then the people who do spam will be put back on it really quickly.
Wareze are programs witch you can't get because production and support has stopped... so your able to get them.
Oh wait... You can't get an $18,000 program that you plan to use just to learn for the fun of it.. or educate yourself WITHOUT TECH SUPPORT.
I personally feel that Open Source should be a policy... No more Accounting foofes, no more control of the system by non elected officials(elected people are people you directly choose to fund... with time, respect, and or cash)
I wonder how hard it was to gather 40 armed stupid people to storm that guys house?
I wonder how hard they looked for a passive individual who they could make say "I felt like I was a murderer" or something like that... to make an example of?
Has anybody placed a law enforcement person under citizens arrest for violation of civil rights? Or the procecuter?
We all live in a yellow submarine
I understand that compatability is good for migration...
I've heard the most bad things about BIOS and bus, and other aspects... not just the x86 processors...
When will it be worthwhile to start getting rid of the not used stuff?
Are they keeping the short word instructions doing what they did, or are they making them do more usefull stuff...
(I suppose you could have a single instruction perform multiple operations... one that is old spec and one that is new spec.
Maybe I am considering something to be a problem that isn't...
but as the instruction set increases, don't we have to have more bits to to describe the instruction?... Now I am realising that memory addressing is the big benefit for larger... bus width?
Also, how much faster are natively compiled for transmeta applications than those that go through the instruction conversion caching? (I think thats a way of putting it)
Thank you for your discourse, I am attempting to learn stuff from this conversation.
</cow>
I've heard lots of bad stuff about the x86 architecture...
hacks upon hacks...
Do any of these new 64 bit processors offer a way out?
Is backward compatability with 8086, 286, 386 (sx and dx), 486(sx and dx), 586, 686 now trivial, or solved with a (long term low significance cost to benifit ratio)?
</flame>
Most people want the content from the website.
And get sick of having to wade through all kinds of foofy stuff put up by web devlopers that tell their clients that they need the fancy graphics and flash animatin etc! (when they really want money and false dependance)
HTML is a meta data language for a reason. I like layout control, but the meta data, and end user configuration comes first.
You can change many first person shooters to be less violent.
Chex cereal released a quake or a doom mod, where you shoot a teleporter beam at monsters who wanted to eat your cereal.
Change the weapons and the blood and gore Look.
My mom was not happy with the look of quake, but if it were changed into throwing bibles at the devil she might let it go.
(My mom isn't quite that bad)
We start an open source competitor,
and make it more profitable than they are.
This competitor can beg for donations... and work to assimilate other projects (like MS) and put them under open content licences(not like MS), and ask for more donations.
This company can also provide certification/support for these products/sell individual developer time/bid.
If we provide a better product, people are likely to be willing to pay more for it.
Money will go where it is needed. (maybe those outlook replacement people, and the hurd kernel)
Out grow MS. (profit gets channeled back into the company) With some of the money, buy community projects that are owned by the community.
http://www.openproliferation.org
Why all this S movie is better than that S movie talk. It doesn't matter. We spent money on both of them.
.. I'm guessing that there will be more movies... this was episode 1. It uses the hardware instead of creating it. This movie show us about chaos effect... being bad/ not caring may not have direct consequences... but it will get back to you.
Besides making money:
Starwars to me is about: makebelieve galactic history, special effects/ hardware pushing.
Its really neat that this movie shows a manufactured chrisis to to create addiction to weapon suppliers... This type thing is quite real.
Spiderman seems to about: personal history
Both stories needed to be told. Both stories could have charged me a bit less money.. (been released on fewer screens to lower costs)
I don't want to be addicted to the movie industry