This is good for Dell and PC users. For Dell, it's a consumer product that can be sold at a higher margin than many PCs are garnering these days. Additionally, it represents a pseudo-"killer app" that will give people a reason to buy a computer. Plus, it's just one more wise move on the part of PC makers to emulate iTunes as one of the few legitimate digital music services.
For PC users, it means we can have an iPod-clone that interfaces with our machines. Yay for copies!
Inigo: "Do you hear that Fezzik? That is the sound of ultimate suffering. My heart made that sound when the six-fingered man killed my father. The Man in Black makes it now."
Fezzik: "Actually, it seems to be coming from the direction of the Direct Marketing Association Washington offices..."
For the most part, people can only watch one channel at a time (unless have two-tuner TVs or numerous cable boxes). I tend to download multiple things simultaneously when I'm on Kazaa (Lite).
Taxation isn't social engineering, it's democratic capitalism. Social engineering is when I require your kid to attent my Youth Indoctrination Weekend Getaway four times a year.
Democratic capitalism is when an elected body, with consent of the governed, determines what areas and levels of taxation are appropriate to alter the nature of market transactions. In English, it's about making the incentives match an orderly society.
For example, if we were willing to accept low levels of drug use, we could legalize drugs, legitimize their distribution, and tax them to try and minimize their use. I don't advocate this position, but it's a legitimate form of government, establishing the market.
A better example is environmental law. I can either prohibit a certain pollution, which requires enforcement mechanisms. Or alternatively, I can tax pollution. Taxes would structure the market to discourage pollution and provide revenue to clean up what was left (to the best of our ability).
Either way, it's our government's way of making our society better (by majority rule). And we don't have to get naked to protest...
The Slashdot article is titled, "P2P Music Sharing Remains Popular Despite RIAA" and the Times article displays, "Music File Sharers Keep Sharing."
And yet, in a chart attached to the NY Times story ("Chart: Stealing or Sharing Music?"), it notes that the number of users on Kazaa has declined from 6.5 million to 4.2 million since the RIAA announced its intention to sue users (around June 29). That's a 35% drop, folks!
Sounds to me like people are turning off the file sharing!
"I was promised I would spend eternity in Paradise, being fed honeyed cakes by 67 virgins in a tree-lined garden, if only I would fly the airplane into one of the Twin Towers," said Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers of American Airlines Flight 11, between attempts to vomit up the wasps, hornets, and live coals infesting his stomach. "But instead, I am fed the boiling feces of traitors by malicious, laughing Ifrit. Is this to be my reward for destroying the enemies of my faith?"
This will seem a little offtopic, but I think the market for misspelling is declining. After all, features like auto-complete in browsers mean that for repeated visits, it's a lot harder to end up at the wrong place.
Unless, of course, you are like me and your incorrect spelling is saved in the auto-complete: damn http://slsahdot.org!
I am not a programmer, computer tech, or anything else. I am smart enough to figure out some decent filtering through Outlook Express that usually kills most virus emails and I have one of those real-time scanners going to pick up the stuff.
However, why can't I opt with either my ISP or email provider to have virus emails deleted immediately from the server? It would seem to be economical for either to do so, because they would save server space and prevent the spread of the virus by keeping dumb users from opening the attachments.
Furthermore, should they even have to ask? Virus emails are not really personal or private email, it's junk. I doubt there would be much complaint (from the average Joe) if the Post Office just started throwing away those stupid Valupak coupon things or other mail addressed to "our friend at ADDRESS."
Again, I have no idea what is technically feasible, but perhaps someone could enlighten me as to what an ISP or mail provider could do to cut the spread of virus-laden email before the end user has a change to see who loves them...
The similarity, I thought, was rather clear. All I am saying is that the RIAA and anti-spam activists have laws that they believe support their position. Furthermore, they are willing to use the legal system to seek financial remedy from the perceived violators. Last, the similarity lies in the fact that, regardless of how the case is decided (settlement or verdict), the threat of financial penalty is likely to alter behavior (basic economic theory).
I was not attempting to make a value judgment about the validity or moral imperative of either protagonist.
Anti-spam litigants seem pretty similar to the RIAA in their tactics of making it hurt--financially--for illegal activity. I will be interested to see if each side continues to be successful and if it ultimately causes the behavior changes (in spam and music file-sharing) that they desire.
Unfortunately, I think that the RIAA's financial clout is likely to give it a greater chance of success than individual anti-spam activists.
Actually, the Onion previously reported that North Dakota is harboring nuclear missles. It was the United Nations, though, not Iran who sent the inspectors...
I was a little disappointed in the article. Although they provided some nice data on power supplies, they left it to Slashdot posters to explain why I would care about a quality power supply (other than general "stability problems"). For example, how does A/C ripple affect system performance and stability?
Another item I found lacking is that they only tested one power supply of each type. If you happen to get a bum PS from one manufacturer, you can draw faulty conclusions from the benchmark. They should have at least done two of each to see if there were wild differences. The Ion PS, which performed poorly in the A/C ripple (whatever that means), could have been a bad Ion PS. We'll never know...
Snopes.com is an example of what distinguishes free speech from journalism. There are hundreds of radio shows, newspapers, and even TV programs that will pass off anything that someone else has said as news or information (even major news networks are caught in the act occasionally). Snopes makes sure they actually have it right.
Interestingly enough, the Star Tribune in Minneapolis recently addressed the issue of corrections and accuracy. Ironically, newspapers that report more corrections are perceived as less trustworthy, even though they are often more accurate for the effort! Another story on this issue found here.
...if you feel like you get a good deal, what's the problem?
Think about it this way: two buyers, based on their collected information, are offered DVDs at wildly differing prices. Say buyer one gets said DVD for $1, but buyer two gets it for $10. Both are satisfied, buyer one because it feels really cheap and buyer two because he loves the movie.
Assuming the buyers never converse about the price they paid, both will be satisfied with the exchange value of the DVD, despite buyer two's costs being 10 times his compatriot's.
Ironically, if the two buyers did share price information, buyer two would immediately become irate, knowing that he could have had a better deal. Then again, it's possible that he might just shrug and say, "it was still worth it." I think it just puts the onus on the shopper to be as informed as possible about the value of their purchase and on the seller to make sure their discriminatory pricing doesn't leak out.
I couldn't find a link to it (old story), but the class ring company Josten's had different pricing scales for inner city and suburban school in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area a few years back. The shit hit the fan when the media caught wind. Ironically, I don't know that they ever changed their pricing scheme.
It's not about a right to privacy! It's the fact that there's no fecking legal basis for them to complain about their industry being punished by law. It's a democracy! We can decide that a certain activity constitutes a nuisance (such as loitering, prostitution, etc) and make a law that gets rid of it. But we're not even doing that, we're just allowing people to finally opt out.
My understanding is that microbes (read: bacteria) are already extensively used in the treatment of wastewater. For example, here is a portable toilet with microbial treatment. I salute the folks who have thought to look at the natural world for solutions to other man-made problems.
...why outsourcing serves the large corporate model better than telecommuting:
1) Fewer worries about information security
2) More oversight of employees
3) Telecommuting requires capital outlay to set up systems
4) More oversight of employees
5) Sometimes teleconferencing and videoconferencing just can't replace a real meeting
6) More oversight of employees
7) Outsourcing farms out the most expensive part of real employees--insurance costs.
My experience working at Best Buy's corporate headquarters showed that items 2,4, and 6 were pervasive among middle management, while the remaining were reasons the Board of Directors was happier with outsourcing.
Slashdot Mirror
It might give them some appreciation for jumping movie ticket prices. And don't even get me started on the $5 bucket beverage...
I'll have to try it another time...
For PC users, it means we can have an iPod-clone that interfaces with our machines. Yay for copies!
Fezzik: "Actually, it seems to be coming from the direction of the Direct Marketing Association Washington offices..."
I love your work. Please contact my buddy Karl R. about a repeat in Florida in 2004.
Thanks
"Tex"
This is just what we needed, thanks!
-GWB, DC, and DR
Democratic capitalism is when an elected body, with consent of the governed, determines what areas and levels of taxation are appropriate to alter the nature of market transactions. In English, it's about making the incentives match an orderly society.
For example, if we were willing to accept low levels of drug use, we could legalize drugs, legitimize their distribution, and tax them to try and minimize their use. I don't advocate this position, but it's a legitimate form of government, establishing the market.
A better example is environmental law. I can either prohibit a certain pollution, which requires enforcement mechanisms. Or alternatively, I can tax pollution. Taxes would structure the market to discourage pollution and provide revenue to clean up what was left (to the best of our ability).
Either way, it's our government's way of making our society better (by majority rule). And we don't have to get naked to protest...
-1, Ouch
And yet, in a chart attached to the NY Times story ("Chart: Stealing or Sharing Music?"), it notes that the number of users on Kazaa has declined from 6.5 million to 4.2 million since the RIAA announced its intention to sue users (around June 29). That's a 35% drop, folks!
Sounds to me like people are turning off the file sharing!
I, for one, welcome our new Google overlords.
[/transmission]
"I was promised I would spend eternity in Paradise, being fed honeyed cakes by 67 virgins in a tree-lined garden, if only I would fly the airplane into one of the Twin Towers," said Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers of American Airlines Flight 11, between attempts to vomit up the wasps, hornets, and live coals infesting his stomach. "But instead, I am fed the boiling feces of traitors by malicious, laughing Ifrit. Is this to be my reward for destroying the enemies of my faith?"
Unless, of course, you are like me and your incorrect spelling is saved in the auto-complete: damn http://slsahdot.org!
However, why can't I opt with either my ISP or email provider to have virus emails deleted immediately from the server? It would seem to be economical for either to do so, because they would save server space and prevent the spread of the virus by keeping dumb users from opening the attachments.
Furthermore, should they even have to ask? Virus emails are not really personal or private email, it's junk. I doubt there would be much complaint (from the average Joe) if the Post Office just started throwing away those stupid Valupak coupon things or other mail addressed to "our friend at ADDRESS."
Again, I have no idea what is technically feasible, but perhaps someone could enlighten me as to what an ISP or mail provider could do to cut the spread of virus-laden email before the end user has a change to see who loves them...
I was not attempting to make a value judgment about the validity or moral imperative of either protagonist.
Sorry for the confusion.
Unfortunately, I think that the RIAA's financial clout is likely to give it a greater chance of success than individual anti-spam activists.
Actually, the Onion previously reported that North Dakota is harboring nuclear missles. It was the United Nations, though, not Iran who sent the inspectors...
Another item I found lacking is that they only tested one power supply of each type. If you happen to get a bum PS from one manufacturer, you can draw faulty conclusions from the benchmark. They should have at least done two of each to see if there were wild differences. The Ion PS, which performed poorly in the A/C ripple (whatever that means), could have been a bad Ion PS. We'll never know...
Interestingly enough, the Star Tribune in Minneapolis recently addressed the issue of corrections and accuracy. Ironically, newspapers that report more corrections are perceived as less trustworthy, even though they are often more accurate for the effort! Another story on this issue found here.
Think about it this way: two buyers, based on their collected information, are offered DVDs at wildly differing prices. Say buyer one gets said DVD for $1, but buyer two gets it for $10. Both are satisfied, buyer one because it feels really cheap and buyer two because he loves the movie.
Assuming the buyers never converse about the price they paid, both will be satisfied with the exchange value of the DVD, despite buyer two's costs being 10 times his compatriot's.
Ironically, if the two buyers did share price information, buyer two would immediately become irate, knowing that he could have had a better deal. Then again, it's possible that he might just shrug and say, "it was still worth it." I think it just puts the onus on the shopper to be as informed as possible about the value of their purchase and on the seller to make sure their discriminatory pricing doesn't leak out.
I couldn't find a link to it (old story), but the class ring company Josten's had different pricing scales for inner city and suburban school in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area a few years back. The shit hit the fan when the media caught wind. Ironically, I don't know that they ever changed their pricing scheme.
1) Fewer worries about information security
2) More oversight of employees
3) Telecommuting requires capital outlay to set up systems
4) More oversight of employees
5) Sometimes teleconferencing and videoconferencing just can't replace a real meeting
6) More oversight of employees
7) Outsourcing farms out the most expensive part of real employees--insurance costs.
My experience working at Best Buy's corporate headquarters showed that items 2,4, and 6 were pervasive among middle management, while the remaining were reasons the Board of Directors was happier with outsourcing.