As much as I can understand why they do not want people melting down these coins, how much is the metal really worth in it's "raw" form unrefined?
My second question is how much would it cost to refine these metals to make them worth the most? Copper prices are sky high right now but a lump of melted pennies probably wouldn't be able to be sold as a "copper" since there are a number of other metals involved. Is this something that can really be profitable?
In a pyramid scheme, the only "value" rests in extending the pyramid
Yeah, and as a member of the scheme you know this because that's the appeal... the concept of getting others involved and getting a cut of their income is widely the basis of recruiting others into such an organization. How can you claim this isn't true?
As for lack of value in a service or product: are you crazy? Just about everyone out there knows that WalMart is a (small) step above a second hand store and look at the people flock to it. In our consumer society value is taking a backseat to quantity. The people know they're buying a shoddy product.
Now, composing/arranging those notes, the sequence they are played in, the duration, etc., that involves skill.
You're missing the point that someone created the scroll for the player piano. The effort to create this scroll is not much different than the effort it takes to program a sequencer. I'm not talking about the actual playing of the scroll itself.
Aha! You admit yourself that, although you could complete the mechanical process, the end result was not worth listening to.
Uh, no. I said it wasn't very good. It was still music. Don't take my statement as meaning "I couldn't get two notes to go together to save my life". I just felt that in light of what others had produced most of what I created was fairly simple. It was a random musing, by my standards, but was far from just pressing a few keys to make some noise come out the other side. My "compositions" actually had structure and a very elementary musical value. I was the equivalent of most guys who buy a guitar in the hopes of being the next Jimi Hendrix or Dave Mustaine... I enjoyed it, I played around with it, I could make some music but it was far from being something to "put to wax".
As far as arguing if this guy is a musician or composer? Actually, I'm not worried about what label he gets stuck with to be honest with you. I'm merely pointing out that what he's doing isn't much different from programing a sequencer. It's not that he's untalented but I'm just not understanding why this was frontpage slashdot material. Is it neat in it's own right? Sure. But I think we're getting away from the "news for nerds" ideal. I could find a dozen pages with something neat on them that uses the types of technology and science we discuss here but I'd find myself hard pressed to submit them as newsworthy.
To compare the creation of this particular piece to sitting down at a player piano and pumping the pedals to create a new song... I won't even discuss it
I can understand why... because it's not silly. The "punch card" styled sheet that feeds information to a player piano is not that much different than using a sequencer. Granted, you have much more control over the tones and (potentially) the samples you use but it's still playing certain notes at specific times for a duration based on a "script". As many other users have pointed out this is also non-different from the "mods" music files that were fairly popular in the late 80s until the advent of mp3.
I wrote a number of mods myself, most weren't very good (IMO). I'm not a musician either nor did I take what I was writing seriously. In all honesty I don't think it took much skill to be able to pump out something with a good rhythm to it, I just was never really happy with my own final product.
Ok, mr insightful, you care to elaborate on this? My experience is that when people leave thigns this open ended they're normally talking out of their ass.
After all, the same could be said of Beethoven
Actually, not in the same context. Beethoven actually had the dexterity and skills to play this in real time. We're talking more about sampling and creating a pattern that is programmed into a machine and played back by a machine. The closest you'll get to that prior to electronics is the self-playing piano.
It seems to me that the story isn't about a guy who wrote a song (on paper) but rather assembled a song (in sampled sounds). If this is the same thing to you as Beethoven than this is the same as any other song ever writen making this even less of a story. So, it seems that we're back to my original point.
He is unskilled musician. The others were highly skilled musicians.
there were no "high skilled" sequencer technicians at the time. It was an emerging technology. Most of these guys in the krautrock genre were doing experimental music, a lot of them probably had little real music training.
As for the rest? Yeah, the video wasn't there. Is this what really makes it newsworthy?
I'm not a game developer and I don't know much about it but what's the costs associated with developing for other consoles? MS offering educational stuff for free or damn close to it isn't that bad of a deal, from where I sit.
MS put a lot of cash down to develop an entire platform, they stuck out their necks... if you're making cash from a venture involving their proprietary platform tell me where their cut comes from?
Yeah, because putting out good music takes no investment.
What is our problem in society that we feel that if we lable an effort as "art" it should somehow be free but the "work" we do daily should have the highest dollar amount on it? Do you feel that "artists" don't "work" when they do their "art"?
How on earth can anyone actually feel free in a country where citizens are put behind bars for minor fraud, while businesses like HP (which are actually run by REAL people!!) can pay-off a judge while calling it 'being sanctioned'?
It's called a CIVIL case. If you're not familiar with the American legal system you probably don't know how far off base you are. You can not be "put behind bars" in a civil case. This is a case to determine liability in terms of monetary damages. The criminal case will still happen and that's where people get jailed.
Either you don't know what you're talking about or you're just a troll.
So you're saying that Paris Hilton is very intelligent and hard working?
No, but the people who are making her rich (aside from her family fortune) aren't very intelligent either.
The same people who are crying about spending an extra 2.50 USD for gas a week are normally the same people who are keeping the Hollywood elite rich.
The "poor" needs to work harder not at the job but in their own personal space in not being nickled and dimed by pop culture salesmanship. And what about the "poor's" obsession with the WalMart culture? How many "poor" have a large DVD collection or collection of crap from QVC?
Generally speaking the "poor" aren't as bad off as they were 50 years ago. Granted, there are the extremely poor who are making an honest effort who deserve help but normally your local ghetto/trailer trash are not these people, they're people who fritter away what little coin they have on some really shoddy trash.
Using this device to that point would indeed leave evidence, more so than a lot of common chemical agents that are currently popular in crowd control. If you would have read the article thoroughly you would have known this.
And regardless, I still can't get what's wrong with the water cannon. It's a tried and true crowd control method, and yet it's not used at all anymore in the U.S. What's cheaper than a water cannon?
I think it's still a viable source of crowd control in some instances but the positive effects of this new instrument is that it won't be tied to a water source and the discomfort factor seems to be higher. A good water cannon can't be deployed just anywhere and to port that much water around is tough at best.
Actually, I neither defended nor attacked anything except for being told that I didn't know jack about games because I enjoy a couple of EA titles and I did support EA in their right to earn a buck.
I made no comments on EA as an employer. I made no claim that EA produces gold everytime. I never said that this is black and white.
Maybe I wouldn't have to take the time to recount and defend my original point if the other poster hadn't started his entire statement with "Everyone who doesn't have a negative opinion of EA doesnt know jack about games." And then went on to state that he never even played the titles that I feel are good from EA.
Both of you are acting like I'm a fanboi and frankly if you're going to do that I'd like for you to back that up with something.
If I turned my back on every company that I feel has screwed up a game franchise I was into I don't think I'd be a gamer at all at this point. The only exception to this I can even begin to think of is Valve and I know what kind of warm reception they get around here too.
And consider too that sometimes a game is good for what it is and shouldn't be pushed into sequel after sequel ad nauseum because eventually they're going to produce a bad product. Does this mean the one bad product makes the other products suck? No.
Does EA's business practices suck? Probably. I'm not that involved with them or their products. But my original intention was never to question EA as a business outside of the fact that they need to produce a product that can make them a profit, which many fringe games simply don't make large inroads. That was the entire point of my post.
Slashdot Mirror
Pimp Daddy Welfare still rocks over any nerd core.
Chan Nai-ming, a 38-year-old BitTorrent user known as 'Big Crook,'
In prison his user name will be "Ben Dover"
My problem with getting rid of the $1 bill... How do I pay the stripers?
As much as I can understand why they do not want people melting down these coins, how much is the metal really worth in it's "raw" form unrefined?
My second question is how much would it cost to refine these metals to make them worth the most? Copper prices are sky high right now but a lump of melted pennies probably wouldn't be able to be sold as a "copper" since there are a number of other metals involved. Is this something that can really be profitable?
In a pyramid scheme, the only "value" rests in extending the pyramid
Yeah, and as a member of the scheme you know this because that's the appeal... the concept of getting others involved and getting a cut of their income is widely the basis of recruiting others into such an organization. How can you claim this isn't true?
As for lack of value in a service or product: are you crazy? Just about everyone out there knows that WalMart is a (small) step above a second hand store and look at the people flock to it. In our consumer society value is taking a backseat to quantity. The people know they're buying a shoddy product.
Now, composing/arranging those notes, the sequence they are played in, the duration, etc., that involves skill.
You're missing the point that someone created the scroll for the player piano. The effort to create this scroll is not much different than the effort it takes to program a sequencer. I'm not talking about the actual playing of the scroll itself.
Aha! You admit yourself that, although you could complete the mechanical process, the end result was not worth listening to.
Uh, no. I said it wasn't very good. It was still music. Don't take my statement as meaning "I couldn't get two notes to go together to save my life". I just felt that in light of what others had produced most of what I created was fairly simple. It was a random musing, by my standards, but was far from just pressing a few keys to make some noise come out the other side. My "compositions" actually had structure and a very elementary musical value. I was the equivalent of most guys who buy a guitar in the hopes of being the next Jimi Hendrix or Dave Mustaine... I enjoyed it, I played around with it, I could make some music but it was far from being something to "put to wax".
As far as arguing if this guy is a musician or composer? Actually, I'm not worried about what label he gets stuck with to be honest with you. I'm merely pointing out that what he's doing isn't much different from programing a sequencer. It's not that he's untalented but I'm just not understanding why this was frontpage slashdot material. Is it neat in it's own right? Sure. But I think we're getting away from the "news for nerds" ideal. I could find a dozen pages with something neat on them that uses the types of technology and science we discuss here but I'd find myself hard pressed to submit them as newsworthy.
I wouldn't call 20-25 years "many decades" but the sampling aspect of it is very correct.
Actually, early TD is very heavy into the use of the mellotron. Edgar Froese is considered one of the more proficent mellotron muscians.
While I do get your basic point consider how many places actually pump oil from the earth... I'd think the system would be nearly the same.
At least here in the US where we already do transport in most of our fuel from the coast.
To compare the creation of this particular piece to sitting down at a player piano and pumping the pedals to create a new song... I won't even discuss it
I can understand why... because it's not silly. The "punch card" styled sheet that feeds information to a player piano is not that much different than using a sequencer. Granted, you have much more control over the tones and (potentially) the samples you use but it's still playing certain notes at specific times for a duration based on a "script". As many other users have pointed out this is also non-different from the "mods" music files that were fairly popular in the late 80s until the advent of mp3.
I wrote a number of mods myself, most weren't very good (IMO). I'm not a musician either nor did I take what I was writing seriously. In all honesty I don't think it took much skill to be able to pump out something with a good rhythm to it, I just was never really happy with my own final product.
And, yes, you are missing something!
Ok, mr insightful, you care to elaborate on this? My experience is that when people leave thigns this open ended they're normally talking out of their ass.
After all, the same could be said of Beethoven
Actually, not in the same context. Beethoven actually had the dexterity and skills to play this in real time. We're talking more about sampling and creating a pattern that is programmed into a machine and played back by a machine. The closest you'll get to that prior to electronics is the self-playing piano.
It seems to me that the story isn't about a guy who wrote a song (on paper) but rather assembled a song (in sampled sounds). If this is the same thing to you as Beethoven than this is the same as any other song ever writen making this even less of a story. So, it seems that we're back to my original point.
He is unskilled musician. The others were highly skilled musicians.
there were no "high skilled" sequencer technicians at the time. It was an emerging technology. Most of these guys in the krautrock genre were doing experimental music, a lot of them probably had little real music training.
As for the rest? Yeah, the video wasn't there. Is this what really makes it newsworthy?
What are you talking about? I think you responded to the wrong post.
Just remember, most pyramid scheme businesses are open source too.... they depend on it.
So what? Is this really news?
So he sampled sounds, put them in a "sequencer" and created a pattern appealing to the ear.
Tangerine Dream and a bunch of other krauts were doing this 30 years ago.
Am I missing something?
This means the Titanic will be saved! Oh, wait...
The only thing using this Microsoft download earns you is the ability to run the code on the 360.. which Microsoft is already making money on.
Really? I wasn't aware that MS was making money off the 360 in terms of either hardware sales or you running your own code off of their unit.
I'm not a game developer and I don't know much about it but what's the costs associated with developing for other consoles? MS offering educational stuff for free or damn close to it isn't that bad of a deal, from where I sit.
MS put a lot of cash down to develop an entire platform, they stuck out their necks... if you're making cash from a venture involving their proprietary platform tell me where their cut comes from?
Yeah, because putting out good music takes no investment.
What is our problem in society that we feel that if we lable an effort as "art" it should somehow be free but the "work" we do daily should have the highest dollar amount on it? Do you feel that "artists" don't "work" when they do their "art"?
How on earth can anyone actually feel free in a country where citizens are put behind bars for minor fraud, while businesses like HP (which are actually run by REAL people!!) can pay-off a judge while calling it 'being sanctioned'?
It's called a CIVIL case. If you're not familiar with the American legal system you probably don't know how far off base you are. You can not be "put behind bars" in a civil case. This is a case to determine liability in terms of monetary damages. The criminal case will still happen and that's where people get jailed.
Either you don't know what you're talking about or you're just a troll.
Not to even mention WorldWind.
So you're saying that Paris Hilton is very intelligent and hard working?
No, but the people who are making her rich (aside from her family fortune) aren't very intelligent either.
The same people who are crying about spending an extra 2.50 USD for gas a week are normally the same people who are keeping the Hollywood elite rich.
The "poor" needs to work harder not at the job but in their own personal space in not being nickled and dimed by pop culture salesmanship. And what about the "poor's" obsession with the WalMart culture? How many "poor" have a large DVD collection or collection of crap from QVC?
Generally speaking the "poor" aren't as bad off as they were 50 years ago. Granted, there are the extremely poor who are making an honest effort who deserve help but normally your local ghetto/trailer trash are not these people, they're people who fritter away what little coin they have on some really shoddy trash.
We can hire the A-Team to come in and stop them.
I pity the fool who litters Mr T's inbox with ads for home equity loans.
Using this device to that point would indeed leave evidence, more so than a lot of common chemical agents that are currently popular in crowd control. If you would have read the article thoroughly you would have known this.
You make a good point but...
And regardless, I still can't get what's wrong with the water cannon. It's a tried and true crowd control method, and yet it's not used at all anymore in the U.S. What's cheaper than a water cannon?
I think it's still a viable source of crowd control in some instances but the positive effects of this new instrument is that it won't be tied to a water source and the discomfort factor seems to be higher. A good water cannon can't be deployed just anywhere and to port that much water around is tough at best.
So, say what you want to attack or defend EA.
Actually, I neither defended nor attacked anything except for being told that I didn't know jack about games because I enjoy a couple of EA titles and I did support EA in their right to earn a buck.
I made no comments on EA as an employer. I made no claim that EA produces gold everytime. I never said that this is black and white.
Maybe I wouldn't have to take the time to recount and defend my original point if the other poster hadn't started his entire statement with "Everyone who doesn't have a negative opinion of EA doesnt know jack about games." And then went on to state that he never even played the titles that I feel are good from EA.
Both of you are acting like I'm a fanboi and frankly if you're going to do that I'd like for you to back that up with something.
If I turned my back on every company that I feel has screwed up a game franchise I was into I don't think I'd be a gamer at all at this point. The only exception to this I can even begin to think of is Valve and I know what kind of warm reception they get around here too.
And consider too that sometimes a game is good for what it is and shouldn't be pushed into sequel after sequel ad nauseum because eventually they're going to produce a bad product. Does this mean the one bad product makes the other products suck? No.
Does EA's business practices suck? Probably. I'm not that involved with them or their products. But my original intention was never to question EA as a business outside of the fact that they need to produce a product that can make them a profit, which many fringe games simply don't make large inroads. That was the entire point of my post.