I find it funny that without the least interesting (number 10) of the list three other more interesting (numbers 8, 7, and 1) would either not have happened, or would be significantly less interesting. While the 'Hot Coffee' mod might not have been terribly interesting on its own, the fact that it spawned this much attention surely must warrant a higher spot than number 10.
This is stimulating for artists: if they make bad music, they get little monney; if theu are good, then they will get a lot.
That will happen anyway, you're assuming that any two songs, one good, one bad, will sell the same number of copies. In the real world the good song will sell more copies, and will make more money regardless of price (unless of course the popularity difference is on a scale with the price difference, resulting in 1 cent songs and $1million songs).
What this model is really doing, is punishing artists for producing music that isn't liked by everyone, not only are their sales numbers lower, you're then cutting their profit per song to the point that their profit may end up negative.
This sounds like a new method of "making the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer".
Just to play I did a search for my web site "homelessirc", it had about 4 pages worth of hits. So, I start looking through the 4 pages of hits and was rather disapointed to find that most of the results were duplicates from the same page or very very closely related pages (the sort of hits google would filter out automatically).
Then when I hit the third page I noticed that there were now magically 7 pages of results. So I looked back at the other pages, and their page counter jumps between 4, 5, 7 and back down to 4.
further grumblings about poorly copying google's home page....
Forget canibalization, how do they define a computer in the first place? do they define it as a Dell, an HP, or a Compaq? or do they define it as a motherboard or processor? I have 6 computers and I made all of them from parts I bought at my local computer store. Do my 6 computers count in that 1 billion?
If you want a secure wireless network why not just impliment every security procedure you can think of and stack them? I'm not too familiar with wireless, I've never actually delt with it personally, but I've talked to people who have, and they said that they use 512 bit encryption combined with a DMZ, and that locks everything down pretty well. Then if you're REALLY REALLY REALLY paranoid and you want to contain the wireless users to a certain building, you can always line the walls with a wire mesh screen to block the signal. Yes, easier said than done, I know, but if you're psychoticly paranoid it might be worth it
Many people I know, myself included, have the cable modem plugged into a hub, and all computers on the connection plugged into the hub, this is the easiest/only way I know of to use multiple IP's on the same connection. And before AT&T's problems I had all my local traffic going through the hub, but with the new IP's and subnet masks they assign all my local traffic goes through the default gateway before going to the other computer.
I have two computer connecting in on my @home connection, both with their own IP, and with the recent changes in @home they set my two computers so they have vastly different IP's, different and subnetmasks placing them on seperate networks. I may not be the smartest person in the world when it comes to networking, but I do know that when two computers are on different networks like that all communications between them must go through a gateway first no matter what their physical relation to eachother. This means that all network traffic that I have going between my home computers is going through AT&T's gateway, giving them the possibility to spy on me. I'm not usuallty the paranoid type, but this seems very intrusive to me. Fortunately I do know enough about networking to change the subnet masks to prevent that, but what about all the hundreds of thousands of people who don't know how to do that? Are they doomed to have insecure home networks with AT&T spying on everything they do? or am I missing something here?
Slashdot Mirror
Left a word out of the subject, perhaps the addition of the word "least" makes a little more sense.
I find it funny that without the least interesting (number 10) of the list three other more interesting (numbers 8, 7, and 1) would either not have happened, or would be significantly less interesting. While the 'Hot Coffee' mod might not have been terribly interesting on its own, the fact that it spawned this much attention surely must warrant a higher spot than number 10.
This is stimulating for artists: if they make bad music, they get little monney; if theu are good, then they will get a lot.
That will happen anyway, you're assuming that any two songs, one good, one bad, will sell the same number of copies. In the real world the good song will sell more copies, and will make more money regardless of price (unless of course the popularity difference is on a scale with the price difference, resulting in 1 cent songs and $1million songs).
What this model is really doing, is punishing artists for producing music that isn't liked by everyone, not only are their sales numbers lower, you're then cutting their profit per song to the point that their profit may end up negative.
This sounds like a new method of "making the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer".
Just to play I did a search for my web site "homelessirc", it had about 4 pages worth of hits. So, I start looking through the 4 pages of hits and was rather disapointed to find that most of the results were duplicates from the same page or very very closely related pages (the sort of hits google would filter out automatically).
Then when I hit the third page I noticed that there were now magically 7 pages of results. So I looked back at the other pages, and their page counter jumps between 4, 5, 7 and back down to 4.
further grumblings about poorly copying google's home page....
Forget canibalization, how do they define a computer in the first place? do they define it as a Dell, an HP, or a Compaq? or do they define it as a motherboard or processor? I have 6 computers and I made all of them from parts I bought at my local computer store. Do my 6 computers count in that 1 billion?
If you want a secure wireless network why not just impliment every security procedure you can think of and stack them? I'm not too familiar with wireless, I've never actually delt with it personally, but I've talked to people who have, and they said that they use 512 bit encryption combined with a DMZ, and that locks everything down pretty well. Then if you're REALLY REALLY REALLY paranoid and you want to contain the wireless users to a certain building, you can always line the walls with a wire mesh screen to block the signal. Yes, easier said than done, I know, but if you're psychoticly paranoid it might be worth it
Many people I know, myself included, have the cable modem plugged into a hub, and all computers on the connection plugged into the hub, this is the easiest/only way I know of to use multiple IP's on the same connection. And before AT&T's problems I had all my local traffic going through the hub, but with the new IP's and subnet masks they assign all my local traffic goes through the default gateway before going to the other computer.
I have two computer connecting in on my @home connection, both with their own IP, and with the recent changes in @home they set my two computers so they have vastly different IP's, different and subnetmasks placing them on seperate networks. I may not be the smartest person in the world when it comes to networking, but I do know that when two computers are on different networks like that all communications between them must go through a gateway first no matter what their physical relation to eachother. This means that all network traffic that I have going between my home computers is going through AT&T's gateway, giving them the possibility to spy on me. I'm not usuallty the paranoid type, but this seems very intrusive to me. Fortunately I do know enough about networking to change the subnet masks to prevent that, but what about all the hundreds of thousands of people who don't know how to do that? Are they doomed to have insecure home networks with AT&T spying on everything they do? or am I missing something here?