I'm afraid you've entirely missed the point of my post. The RIAA's business model is broken, and I was merely demonstrating why prices are, quite simply, too high. If you had read my post carefully, you'd see I was listing generic situations where a music purchase would be ruled out because the cost:value ratio is out of proportion. I only mentioned my own tendency to buy a large amount of recorded music as even I'm not willing to hand over 110% of my disposable income over for music despite the fact that I have an above average interest in music. And this is exactly what the RIAA expects you to do.
The labels are failing to grasp that when the cost of their product is significantly higher than the consumer's perceived value of the said product, revenue is going to fall, often to levels lower than they would have been at a lower price point simply because sales volume drops *that* much. Rather than react accordingly to adjust to the consumer's change in perceived value, be that by lowering price, adding new content, or both, the industry has instead decided to blame the consumers for the labels' own failure to grasp basic economic principles.
That's the point I was making. In the future, it might be a good idea to fully understand a post before slinging condescending flames - it makes you come off as an asshat, which I honestly don't believe you are. Besides, if you go out of your way to piss the other guy off, you're never going to convince them of anything, you're just going to piss them off. 'Nuff said.:)
Which reality do you live in? You do realize that a huge segment of the music downloading population is made up of the under-25 demographic, right? In short, their parents are paying for the computer, internet connection, college, etc. They have some disposable income, but for the average high school kid, CDs are incredibly overpriced.
Personally, I buy an above average number of CDs as is, but when it comes down to it, if I have to choose between buying another CD for almost $20 including tax or going out with friends, eating out at a fairly nice restraunt, taking a girl to the movies, whatever, what do you think I'm likely to pick more often than not? As I said, I already buy far more CDs in a couple of months than most people do in a year, but my disposable income only goes so far, no matter how great my love of music is or how much I WANT to buy an album.
With albums priced the way they are, for many high school kids, who are a major part of the RIAA's market, buying a single CD a month is often times half the kid's spending money for that time, and I think that's the point the original poster was making. Asking me to spend that much of your spending money on a single, generally ephemeral item is asking too much on the RIAA's part.
I definitely concur with you that there's good music to be found, if you're just willing to look hard enough. It really is a shame that some of these labels (especially Vagrant, IMO) are choosing to affiliate with the RIAA. They have some amazing bands signed to them, and it breaks my hear that some of my money goes to feed the beast when I pick up, say, the new Alkaline Trio record.
Since you had a '?' on Drive-Thru, I'll clarify for you - Drive-Thru's never actually been indie. They were set up by one of the majors to be run "like an indie label," but they've always had major label money backing them. Kind of a moot point in this case since Thursday's on Victory Records anyway. And as a sidenote, I'm seeing them live tonight, and their new CD drops tommorow. I'm praying they'll have a few copies at the merch booth.:)
The coders *DO* have a say in the matter, because if they quit, and other responsible coders refuse to take the position, SCO can't do what they're doing.
Are you so sure about that? Having the coders quit wouldn't slow down SCO's current litigation one bit, as the litigation doesn't require new code to be produced. Hell, it doesn't even require SCO to have produced any code; they just have to have some type of claim to the "Unix Intellectual Property" and a good number of lawyers. There may very well be coders at SCO simply because they have to keep a roof over their heads and food in their kids mouths. As far as I know, Utah isn't exactly a booming IT hot spot.
You missed my point. =) I'm not talking about streaming playback, I'm talking about moving the file from one computer to another while silmoultaneously erases the bits of the source file that have already been copied, hence avoiding the "multiple copies" problem that transfer of ownership would entail.
I was just thinking actually. It should be technically feasible to write a piece of software that would stream music from one machine to another, but the key being it would delete the original on the fly after a sumcheck of the particular block it was working on. While the system obviously wouldn't work with the current iTunes system, it might be possible to open up a legal door for filesharing between a small group. Just a thought.
Oh how I wished that weren't true a couple of weeks ago. I was showing somehow how to work with the Linux commandline, and was specifically showing them how they could remove a package they didn't need any more. Well, this package included a bin directory. But it was about 2am and in a total lapse of all thinking, I added a nice little / in front of bin so I had 'rm -f/bin.' Your post brought back a nice flashback of it dawning on me what had happened when I tried to ls and got unknown command errors.:)
Fortunately it was a clean install of Lycoris (hence why I was screwing around as root - it defaults that for basic users) and the guy was just learning, so it wasn't a big deal, but I did and still feel reallllly stupid about that one.
Your submission is more informative, but honestly, my bet is it was rejected because you went overboard on your links. For example, you had 3 different links on the F5E, when one would have more than sufficed. I think the article that was actually accepted is on the opposite extreme of the spectrum (one link?), but with your's, you have to play the "Guess which one's the story that you actually want to read" game.
Note, this isn't a flame. I'm just trying to give you constructive criticism that might help in the future.:)
Re:64-benchmarks wont be good
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 1
You'll notice that I mentioned that specifically. There are differences between the two chips beyond clock rate, hence why I said it'd give you a general idea, but nothing specific. =)
Re:But is it representative?
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
(am I the only person who got several pages without content in the preview?)
I read this article this morning long before it hit slashdot and didn't have that problem. What it likely was is that several of the pages were nothing but images (charts) and poor anand was suffering a slashdotting when you tried accessing them. Hence, nothing came up. Might want to try again when the frenzy dies down some.
But due to cross licensing agreements, Intel could build an x86-64 chip if they decided to, and in fact, there are rumors of a "Yamhill" project at Intel that is just that. Intel's still betting a lot on IA-64, but they're not quite crazy enough to bet the farm yet.
Re:Idiots...
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
They have announced physical packaging changes scheduled about every 4 months until 2005.
Do you have a source on this? Everything I've read on the Athlon64s for months on end now has mentioned nothing but Socket 768.
I have a sneaking suspicion that you're a troll, after all, I seem to recall Intel changing the P4 socket midway through the game. But I take it that's different because they're Intel?
Re:64-benchmarks wont be good
on
AMD64 Preview
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I actually read this this morning, and there are a couple of important things to note - the chip being 'previewed' isn't actually an Athlon64 - it's a 1.8GHz Opteron overclocked to 2.0GHz, which is the expected clock rate of the first A64, prorated at 3200+. It'll give us an idea of what to expect, but nothing too specific.
The other important thing to note is that the comparisons were mostly against P4s and an Athlon XP, with a Dual 3.06GHz Xeon thrown in for good measure, all 32 bit chips. And the 'Athlon64' owned most of the competitions, showing that its 32 bit mode is just as good as rumored. There were no Itaniums in the competition since, so only 32 bit modes can be compared here. However, if the A64 turns out to be as good in its native 64 bit mode as the 32 bit number might lead you to believe, the Athlon 64 looks like it very well could be a force to be dealt with.
The difference is, Linux started as a totally hobby thing with no real intention of really being used by anyone other than Linus. Be, on the other hand, was trying to create a commercial operating system, and as such, had put hard time and money into developing their product before even having a chance at gaining a foothold. The Linux companies essentially had a ready-made product that simply needed packaging and support. Be didn't have that luxury.
Remember, Linux has been in development since 1991-1992, and has only really gained commercial acceptance in the past 3-4 years. A startup commercial software companies simply can't afford 7 or 8 years of funding major development before they kind of, sort of start to gain acceptance.
It's different in that MS was already established as a virtual monopoly and used these tactics in order to raise the barrier to entry even higher - to near impossible.
This would be like your warplane analogy only if the DoD had a contract with Boeing saying that, in order to receive a decent price on the B-52, they could buy Boeing, and only Boeing warplanes. A bit different in my book.
Obvious, perhaps, but both Visual Studio.NET and VS.NET 2003 are written use.NET, and are huge improvements in the UI side of things over previous versions.
It does music well in the sense that you search for it, click it, and it downloads. With EMule, if you're looking for music, it'll take forever and a day to actually download because of the queueing system. It's great for larger files like CD images, but sucks for 3mb mp3s.
I didn't say Kazaa was the best, simply that eMule isn't a viable replacement for it.
I love emule, but I hope you're kidding. While emule does many things very well (ie: cd-images) the one thing kazaa does well (music) is something emule does very poorly.
Check out my post a couple up from yours. There was nothing wrong with the Corvair. Nader invented a problem because he needed publicity. Ralph didn't fix anything, as what he claimed was broken was perfectly fine to begin with. You are correct that Nader's book was released in '65 while GM had already redesigned the rear suspension by '64, but to me, that doesn't change anything. Nader has built his entire career off that lie (I can't think of anything else to call it), and while he may have good intentions, it surprises me someone like Nader would take a Machiavellian approach to... well... anything.
Think of how many hits per day Slashdot gets. Now multiply that times the size of even a small HTML page on the issue. I'd that with as large an audience as Slashdot has, doing something like that would be prohibitively expensive from a bandwidth standpoint, especially considering how many people obsessively reload the front page.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid you've entirely missed the point of my post. The RIAA's business model is broken, and I was merely demonstrating why prices are, quite simply, too high. If you had read my post carefully, you'd see I was listing generic situations where a music purchase would be ruled out because the cost:value ratio is out of proportion. I only mentioned my own tendency to buy a large amount of recorded music as even I'm not willing to hand over 110% of my disposable income over for music despite the fact that I have an above average interest in music. And this is exactly what the RIAA expects you to do.
:)
The labels are failing to grasp that when the cost of their product is significantly higher than the consumer's perceived value of the said product, revenue is going to fall, often to levels lower than they would have been at a lower price point simply because sales volume drops *that* much. Rather than react accordingly to adjust to the consumer's change in perceived value, be that by lowering price, adding new content, or both, the industry has instead decided to blame the consumers for the labels' own failure to grasp basic economic principles.
That's the point I was making. In the future, it might be a good idea to fully understand a post before slinging condescending flames - it makes you come off as an asshat, which I honestly don't believe you are. Besides, if you go out of your way to piss the other guy off, you're never going to convince them of anything, you're just going to piss them off. 'Nuff said.
Which reality do you live in? You do realize that a huge segment of the music downloading population is made up of the under-25 demographic, right? In short, their parents are paying for the computer, internet connection, college, etc. They have some disposable income, but for the average high school kid, CDs are incredibly overpriced.
Personally, I buy an above average number of CDs as is, but when it comes down to it, if I have to choose between buying another CD for almost $20 including tax or going out with friends, eating out at a fairly nice restraunt, taking a girl to the movies, whatever, what do you think I'm likely to pick more often than not? As I said, I already buy far more CDs in a couple of months than most people do in a year, but my disposable income only goes so far, no matter how great my love of music is or how much I WANT to buy an album.
With albums priced the way they are, for many high school kids, who are a major part of the RIAA's market, buying a single CD a month is often times half the kid's spending money for that time, and I think that's the point the original poster was making. Asking me to spend that much of your spending money on a single, generally ephemeral item is asking too much on the RIAA's part.
I definitely concur with you that there's good music to be found, if you're just willing to look hard enough. It really is a shame that some of these labels (especially Vagrant, IMO) are choosing to affiliate with the RIAA. They have some amazing bands signed to them, and it breaks my hear that some of my money goes to feed the beast when I pick up, say, the new Alkaline Trio record.
:)
Since you had a '?' on Drive-Thru, I'll clarify for you - Drive-Thru's never actually been indie. They were set up by one of the majors to be run "like an indie label," but they've always had major label money backing them. Kind of a moot point in this case since Thursday's on Victory Records anyway. And as a sidenote, I'm seeing them live tonight, and their new CD drops tommorow. I'm praying they'll have a few copies at the merch booth.
Are you so sure about that? Having the coders quit wouldn't slow down SCO's current litigation one bit, as the litigation doesn't require new code to be produced. Hell, it doesn't even require SCO to have produced any code; they just have to have some type of claim to the "Unix Intellectual Property" and a good number of lawyers. There may very well be coders at SCO simply because they have to keep a roof over their heads and food in their kids mouths. As far as I know, Utah isn't exactly a booming IT hot spot.
You missed my point. =) I'm not talking about streaming playback, I'm talking about moving the file from one computer to another while silmoultaneously erases the bits of the source file that have already been copied, hence avoiding the "multiple copies" problem that transfer of ownership would entail.
I was just thinking actually. It should be technically feasible to write a piece of software that would stream music from one machine to another, but the key being it would delete the original on the fly after a sumcheck of the particular block it was working on. While the system obviously wouldn't work with the current iTunes system, it might be possible to open up a legal door for filesharing between a small group. Just a thought.
A full scale slashdotting even at 3:00AM EST. Impressive. :)
Oh how I wished that weren't true a couple of weeks ago. I was showing somehow how to work with the Linux commandline, and was specifically showing them how they could remove a package they didn't need any more. Well, this package included a bin directory. But it was about 2am and in a total lapse of all thinking, I added a nice little / in front of bin so I had 'rm -f
Fortunately it was a clean install of Lycoris (hence why I was screwing around as root - it defaults that for basic users) and the guy was just learning, so it wasn't a big deal, but I did and still feel reallllly stupid about that one.
Ahhh that's amateur stuff. For the true connoisseur in hard drive destruction, we have this.
:)
Sorry, I don't speak the language that it's in, so I can't provide translation, but I think the pictures speak for themselves.
hehe Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking myself when the QuickTime plug-in loaded up in Moz :)
Simple. You install a larger diameter fan at lower RPM to move the same CFM with less noise. The big problem inside a computer is how to mount it.
Your submission is more informative, but honestly, my bet is it was rejected because you went overboard on your links. For example, you had 3 different links on the F5E, when one would have more than sufficed. I think the article that was actually accepted is on the opposite extreme of the spectrum (one link?), but with your's, you have to play the "Guess which one's the story that you actually want to read" game. Note, this isn't a flame. I'm just trying to give you constructive criticism that might help in the future. :)
You'll notice that I mentioned that specifically. There are differences between the two chips beyond clock rate, hence why I said it'd give you a general idea, but nothing specific. =)
I read this article this morning long before it hit slashdot and didn't have that problem. What it likely was is that several of the pages were nothing but images (charts) and poor anand was suffering a slashdotting when you tried accessing them. Hence, nothing came up. Might want to try again when the frenzy dies down some.
I actually read this this morning, and there are a couple of important things to note - the chip being 'previewed' isn't actually an Athlon64 - it's a 1.8GHz Opteron overclocked to 2.0GHz, which is the expected clock rate of the first A64, prorated at 3200+. It'll give us an idea of what to expect, but nothing too specific.
The other important thing to note is that the comparisons were mostly against P4s and an Athlon XP, with a Dual 3.06GHz Xeon thrown in for good measure, all 32 bit chips. And the 'Athlon64' owned most of the competitions, showing that its 32 bit mode is just as good as rumored. There were no Itaniums in the competition since, so only 32 bit modes can be compared here. However, if the A64 turns out to be as good in its native 64 bit mode as the 32 bit number might lead you to believe, the Athlon 64 looks like it very well could be a force to be dealt with.
The difference is, Linux started as a totally hobby thing with no real intention of really being used by anyone other than Linus. Be, on the other hand, was trying to create a commercial operating system, and as such, had put hard time and money into developing their product before even having a chance at gaining a foothold. The Linux companies essentially had a ready-made product that simply needed packaging and support. Be didn't have that luxury. Remember, Linux has been in development since 1991-1992, and has only really gained commercial acceptance in the past 3-4 years. A startup commercial software companies simply can't afford 7 or 8 years of funding major development before they kind of, sort of start to gain acceptance.
It's different in that MS was already established as a virtual monopoly and used these tactics in order to raise the barrier to entry even higher - to near impossible.
This would be like your warplane analogy only if the DoD had a contract with Boeing saying that, in order to receive a decent price on the B-52, they could buy Boeing, and only Boeing warplanes. A bit different in my book.
Obvious, perhaps, but both Visual Studio
It does music well in the sense that you search for it, click it, and it downloads. With EMule, if you're looking for music, it'll take forever and a day to actually download because of the queueing system. It's great for larger files like CD images, but sucks for 3mb mp3s.
I didn't say Kazaa was the best, simply that eMule isn't a viable replacement for it.
I love emule, but I hope you're kidding. While emule does many things very well (ie: cd-images) the one thing kazaa does well (music) is something emule does very poorly.
Check out my post a couple up from yours. There was nothing wrong with the Corvair. Nader invented a problem because he needed publicity. Ralph didn't fix anything, as what he claimed was broken was perfectly fine to begin with. You are correct that Nader's book was released in '65 while GM had already redesigned the rear suspension by '64, but to me, that doesn't change anything. Nader has built his entire career off that lie (I can't think of anything else to call it), and while he may have good intentions, it surprises me someone like Nader would take a Machiavellian approach to... well... anything.
Think of how many hits per day Slashdot gets. Now multiply that times the size of even a small HTML page on the issue. I'd that with as large an audience as Slashdot has, doing something like that would be prohibitively expensive from a bandwidth standpoint, especially considering how many people obsessively reload the front page.