Wait wait, hold on. Who's pockets are you assuming this money is going in? The board's? Hardly. Any revenue generated by the Wikipedia project goes right back into it the project. How can you be upset about that?
Hmmm... interesting link on global military spending. I noticed that if you take the same stat as a fraction of GDP the United States is 27th at less than 2.4% behind some real winners such as Libya, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and North Korea which spends more than 13% of it's GDP on it's military. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/mil_exp_dol_fi g_gdp
"...and this is an example of a court needing to use historical legal theories to grapple with new and previously unforeseen contexts in Cyberspace."
While you may agree with this judgement, using traditional ideas of property and applying them to cyberspace is not always a perfect match and can lead to some pretty awkward judgements. Obviously, the nature of digital property is very different from that of tangible property (tangible in this case literally meaning 'touchable'). As the summary author states, laws are still trying to catch up with this fact, but as we wait for that to happen we have to be careful not to apply the ideas of tangible property too liberally in the context of digital property.
I believe the article is talking about digital prints: one's you take with a digital camera and send in to them. Usually the store will take the pictures right off of whatever media your camera takes, such as compact flash. In those cases, you still get to chose which photos to print. I can vouch for the cheap prices of digital prints from Costco and the like. I've worked at a small photo company that buys it's prints from Costco and resells them with markup. They're that cheap.
You won't notice the difference because your video card/display still uses 8-bits per channel. Where you will notice the difference is in graphics software that allows the editing of 16-bit images. Using 16-bits per channel gives you a very large dynamic range to work with. This comes to play in image operations as simple as brightness/contrast changes: In 8-bits per channel there are only 256 ways to represent brightness... so when you increase the brightness a lot of information is lost (the dynamic range is compressed because you're taking 256 different levels of brightness and 'compressing' them into only, for example, 200 levels of brightness.) With 16-bits per channel there is enough of a dynamic range to say "this pixel is dark, but this pixel next to it is just a little bit darker." When you change the brightness and contrast the graphics software knows that those fall on different levels in the dynamic range and the operations preserve more of the data in the image.
This could fracture the Internet into multiple country and regional mini-internets, with conflicts over IP and Domain Name assignments, with no interconnects between them
Won't happen. I think history has shown that, like how the Internet routes around network failures, business routes around government.
"The price per share (numerator) is the market price of a single share of the stock. The Earnings per share (denominator) is the Net income of the company for the most recent 12 month period, divided by number of shares outstanding." - Wikipedia article.
I'm having the same problem in IE, it's been happening since at least yesterday. Copy the url for the images and paste it into the browser and you see that images.slashdot.org is sending out "400:bad request" responses.
Dunno what's going on, I thought it was my computer/network until I found your comment. Now I think it's probably something on their end.
Microsoft's Acrylic is based off of "Creature House Expression", which they recently acquired. As it turns out, the software isn't all that similiar to Photoshop, most of the tools are actually vector based. Read a short review of the original Creature House Expression here.
This isn't really all that suprising. Business is business, whether it's black, gray, or white market. Affiliate programs work, why wouldn't adware businesses use this method to spread their product? It's interesting to see some estimates on their revenue, however. At first I read the slashdot summary and thought they were talking about $75,000 revenue annually and was surprised that anyone would even bother making adware for such pittly money. But the 'Aha!' moment came when I reread it and saw that's the estimated revenue for one-weeks worth of business. Damn, not too shabby.
Science just doesn't work when politics gets involved...:(
On the other hand, science like this would never be funded with out politics. There's only a limited amount of money out there to fund endevours like this, and someone has to decide how to divy that money up. So who gets the money? Well you have to create a policy to decide where appropriate funds.... and now you've entered the relm of politics. Whether it's decided by elected senators on the floor of Congress or by a tribunal of society's leading scientists: scarcity leads to a policy of allocation which leads to politics. Can't avoid it.
I totally agree. Generally if I want more information I'll use google or wikipedia to look up background information on the people, places, and events referrenced in the article. But I would love a news source that provides links to that kind of information right in the article. Has anyone found such a place?
I have a feeling that as web-based news sites mature they'll take better advantage of the internet as a news medium. But until then, where do we go?
There are many products that I have come to love (and purchase!) that I would have never known about with out advertising. Plus, the only type of advertising that drives up costs is bad advertising: the kind that generates less sales than the cost of actually producing the ads. Good advertising makes companies and their products in demand, and more importantly, economically feasable.
I was looking for exactly that as well. I want to play WoW, but I can't justify the $50 for a game I can only play if I pay each month.
So I found Second Life. It's less game, more simulation, but you might find it interesting. Free download, free trial. www.secondlife.com.
"If somebody has more then somebody has less."
Of course, because it's all relative. But people being their usual greedy selves for the last 2000+ years has made the poorest richer than they would have been hundreds of years ago. You see, when society benefits as a whole in the long run, the poorer will remain poor (compared to the rich in society) but better than they were in history. That's not much concelation if you're 'poor,' but it does stand up as an argument against your assertian that the poor just keep getting poorer. I'd rather be poor now than poor 100 years ago.
You may be right: nothing here is new. But what other system can I buy music and art using micropayments? The only thing that comes to mind is iTunes, which I use regurlarly and love.
I tend to agree with you: most people will pay for something they really want, which is exactly what this system is designed for. People like me who would rather pay a little for the work than deal with the hassle of finding it on a P2P network. I can only speak for myself, but if this system takes off and reaches a 'critical mass' of content, chances are I'll be a user. Now, are there a significant amount of other people like me out there? Who knows?
Why on earth should the artist get a piece of it every time the same copy is sold?
As I understand it, you're selling a copy of it... as in you get to keep your copy. So they're paying you for distribution costs (bandwidth) and the artist gets a cut for making another sale.
In other words, this is not analogous to buying a cd, and then selling it to a used cd store. Instead, it takes advantage of the cheap replication advantages of digital media.
These guys are out exploring space and the best they can do for excitement is do fantasy games indoors? Losers.
These guys invented a worldwide, always on, instant and interactive communication network and the best they can do for excitement is exchange banter on the future of a sci-fi series? Losers.;o)
That, and "A Modest Proposal" is the de-facto title for a sarcastic proposal. Hey! Freshman english wasn't so useless after all!;o) The original "A Modest Proposal" was written by Jonathan Swift in 1791. It includes (but is not limited to!) the suggestion to eat babies to solve poverty in Ireland.
"...and I believe no gentleman would repine to give ten shillings for the carcass of a good fat child, which, as I have said, will make four dishes of excellent nutritive meat..."
Slashdot Mirror
Wait wait, hold on. Who's pockets are you assuming this money is going in? The board's? Hardly. Any revenue generated by the Wikipedia project goes right back into it the project. How can you be upset about that?
Like your comments on slashdot? Hmm...
Hmmm... interesting link on global military spending. I noticed that if you take the same stat as a fraction of GDP the United States is 27th at less than 2.4% behind some real winners such as Libya, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and North Korea which spends more than 13% of it's GDP on it's military. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/mil_exp_dol_fi g_gdp
"...and this is an example of a court needing to use historical legal theories to grapple with new and previously unforeseen contexts in Cyberspace."
While you may agree with this judgement, using traditional ideas of property and applying them to cyberspace is not always a perfect match and can lead to some pretty awkward judgements. Obviously, the nature of digital property is very different from that of tangible property (tangible in this case literally meaning 'touchable'). As the summary author states, laws are still trying to catch up with this fact, but as we wait for that to happen we have to be careful not to apply the ideas of tangible property too liberally in the context of digital property.
I believe the article is talking about digital prints: one's you take with a digital camera and send in to them. Usually the store will take the pictures right off of whatever media your camera takes, such as compact flash. In those cases, you still get to chose which photos to print. I can vouch for the cheap prices of digital prints from Costco and the like. I've worked at a small photo company that buys it's prints from Costco and resells them with markup. They're that cheap.
Ooops, my parent post was meant for the reply to the GP!
You won't notice the difference because your video card/display still uses 8-bits per channel. Where you will notice the difference is in graphics software that allows the editing of 16-bit images. Using 16-bits per channel gives you a very large dynamic range to work with. This comes to play in image operations as simple as brightness/contrast changes: In 8-bits per channel there are only 256 ways to represent brightness... so when you increase the brightness a lot of information is lost (the dynamic range is compressed because you're taking 256 different levels of brightness and 'compressing' them into only, for example, 200 levels of brightness.) With 16-bits per channel there is enough of a dynamic range to say "this pixel is dark, but this pixel next to it is just a little bit darker." When you change the brightness and contrast the graphics software knows that those fall on different levels in the dynamic range and the operations preserve more of the data in the image.
This could fracture the Internet into multiple country and regional mini-internets, with conflicts over IP and Domain Name assignments, with no interconnects between them
Won't happen. I think history has shown that, like how the Internet routes around network failures, business routes around government.
Price/Earnings ratio.
"The price per share (numerator) is the market price of a single share of the stock. The Earnings per share (denominator) is the Net income of the company for the most recent 12 month period, divided by number of shares outstanding." - Wikipedia article.
Well, the mods may not agree but _I_ thought that was hilarious. :oD
I'm having the same problem in IE, it's been happening since at least yesterday. Copy the url for the images and paste it into the browser and you see that images.slashdot.org is sending out "400:bad request" responses.
Dunno what's going on, I thought it was my computer/network until I found your comment. Now I think it's probably something on their end.
Yes. In fact, this Microsoft announcement sounds like a repackaging of their old technology. What a great day for there marketers!
TV licencing tax?! Noooooo....! all this time I thought the European governments were excising a sin tax!
Microsoft's Acrylic is based off of "Creature House Expression", which they recently acquired. As it turns out, the software isn't all that similiar to Photoshop, most of the tools are actually vector based. Read a short review of the original Creature House Expression here.
This isn't really all that suprising. Business is business, whether it's black, gray, or white market. Affiliate programs work, why wouldn't adware businesses use this method to spread their product? It's interesting to see some estimates on their revenue, however. At first I read the slashdot summary and thought they were talking about $75,000 revenue annually and was surprised that anyone would even bother making adware for such pittly money. But the 'Aha!' moment came when I reread it and saw that's the estimated revenue for one-weeks worth of business. Damn, not too shabby.
Science just doesn't work when politics gets involved... :(
On the other hand, science like this would never be funded with out politics. There's only a limited amount of money out there to fund endevours like this, and someone has to decide how to divy that money up. So who gets the money? Well you have to create a policy to decide where appropriate funds.... and now you've entered the relm of politics. Whether it's decided by elected senators on the floor of Congress or by a tribunal of society's leading scientists: scarcity leads to a policy of allocation which leads to politics. Can't avoid it.
I totally agree. Generally if I want more information I'll use google or wikipedia to look up background information on the people, places, and events referrenced in the article. But I would love a news source that provides links to that kind of information right in the article. Has anyone found such a place?
I have a feeling that as web-based news sites mature they'll take better advantage of the internet as a news medium. But until then, where do we go?
There are many products that I have come to love (and purchase!) that I would have never known about with out advertising. Plus, the only type of advertising that drives up costs is bad advertising: the kind that generates less sales than the cost of actually producing the ads. Good advertising makes companies and their products in demand, and more importantly, economically feasable.
I was looking for exactly that as well. I want to play WoW, but I can't justify the $50 for a game I can only play if I pay each month. So I found Second Life. It's less game, more simulation, but you might find it interesting. Free download, free trial. www.secondlife.com.
"If somebody has more then somebody has less." Of course, because it's all relative. But people being their usual greedy selves for the last 2000+ years has made the poorest richer than they would have been hundreds of years ago. You see, when society benefits as a whole in the long run, the poorer will remain poor (compared to the rich in society) but better than they were in history. That's not much concelation if you're 'poor,' but it does stand up as an argument against your assertian that the poor just keep getting poorer. I'd rather be poor now than poor 100 years ago.
You may be right: nothing here is new. But what other system can I buy music and art using micropayments? The only thing that comes to mind is iTunes, which I use regurlarly and love.
I tend to agree with you: most people will pay for something they really want, which is exactly what this system is designed for. People like me who would rather pay a little for the work than deal with the hassle of finding it on a P2P network. I can only speak for myself, but if this system takes off and reaches a 'critical mass' of content, chances are I'll be a user. Now, are there a significant amount of other people like me out there? Who knows?
As I understand it, you're selling a copy of it... as in you get to keep your copy. So they're paying you for distribution costs (bandwidth) and the artist gets a cut for making another sale.
In other words, this is not analogous to buying a cd, and then selling it to a used cd store. Instead, it takes advantage of the cheap replication advantages of digital media.
These guys are out exploring space and the best they can do for excitement is do fantasy games indoors? Losers.
;o)
These guys invented a worldwide, always on, instant and interactive communication network and the best they can do for excitement is exchange banter on the future of a sci-fi series? Losers.
That, and "A Modest Proposal" is the de-facto title for a sarcastic proposal. Hey! Freshman english wasn't so useless after all! ;o) The original "A Modest Proposal" was written by Jonathan Swift in 1791. It includes (but is not limited to!) the suggestion to eat babies to solve poverty in Ireland.
"...and I believe no gentleman would repine to give ten shillings for the carcass of a good fat child, which, as I have said, will make four dishes of excellent nutritive meat..."
Full text here: http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/Courses/95c/T exts/modest.html
anyone else notice this?
.6m x 2 = 0.12m
Thus: the wavelength is
Does it screw up the rest of the math?