I would hope so, but how is this not using someone else's copyrighted crap for commercial gain?
This is a fun demo of their product, and realistically can't affect Star Trek revenues in a negative way. However, I suspect that some Paramount copyright lawyer might be getting wood about now.
Despite his innovative work, Harriot remains relatively unknown. Unlike Galileo, he did not publish his drawings.
"Thomas Harriot is an unsung hero of science," Chapman said.
Not a chance, Harriot cannot be a hero of science since he did not publish his work. If you don't actually take the risk of publishing and try to contribute your knowledge to the world then you are not a hero of science.
Hmm. So that makes Harriot a Guitar Hero of science?
Over time, however, the oscillations of the individual atoms became synchronized as different modes of the material locked in phase, emerging to become a heartbeat-like "drumming."
There are a lot of good games that don't sell as well as they should.
No kidding. I've heard through the grapevine that Duke Nukem Forever hasn't even sold one copy yet!
C'mon - say it like a marketing spinmeister: Duke Nuke'em forever has sold every copy ever made, and we forecast zero excess channel inventory for at least another few quarters. Furthermore, consumer satisfaction has been so high, that we've not had even one return.
They should have left their research closed. Now anyone can take their research, reverse engineer it, and repackage it under a Creating Commons license.
Clever post, but check out this subtle fact: the authors are absolutely practicing what they preached in that very article:
market segmentation: you get the watered down summary for free, but have to pay for a journal subscription to get the actual article
market seeding: give this version away for free (and I suspect that they'll even send a.pdf of their related working papers) in hopes of capturing customers for the more expensive version (a.k.a. attending their b-schools, or hiring them on as consultants).
In reality though, academic theorists are absolutely the most open source colleagues I've ever had. As long as you adequately cite them, you'll be their bestest friend if you embrace and extend their material. When tenure and promotion decisions are to be made, b-school deans might not be so savvy as to know how good your publications are, but they can easily see how often you work has been cited. Don Jacobs, former dean of Kellogg, said it best, "Maybe we can't read, but we can definitely count."
The slashdot summary author (mjasay) appears to see the world through a lens which makes the developers of open source software victims of some nasty MBA conspiracy.
The academics who wrote the underlying article go out of their way to say that their writings are not a 'how to' manual for MBAs, and that open source software is only one example.
The article is simply a recent take on 'How to compete with free,' an important MBA marketing topic for decades. 'How to compete with free' can be considered a subset of how to compete in general, and the gist of any marketing solution to 'how to compete' will be based on building value in the product.
One method to build value is to increase switching cost through lock-in. Even free / advertising supported services do this: my.yahoo, iTunes, gmail, hotmail and countless others.
If you read the underlying academic article, you just might notice that most of the tools presented now are analogous to the tools presented at Sanford in the early nineties to the MBAs who eventually went on to Coke and Pepsi to fight the scourge of FOSW (Free Open Source Water).
Open source water survived just fine. As long as open source software continues to offer value, it will continue to thrive.
Marketing is marketing. MBA courses are MBA courses. Same shit, different year.
Slashdot Mirror
And that's why my Kindle's flag will be a Jolly Roger.
No problem dude, I'll just change my email to FU_KenFiori@gmail.com .
More like,
All your basis points are belong to us.
Hey - keep the UV lamp on. Get off _and_ get tan. Just try not to burn the bits.
I would hope so, but how is this not using someone else's copyrighted crap for commercial gain?
This is a fun demo of their product, and realistically can't affect Star Trek revenues in a negative way. However, I suspect that some Paramount copyright lawyer might be getting wood about now.
Shhhh. Don't mention the NSA's issuance of iPods with their custom iTap software.
Apparently the chairs were fixed to the floor.
http://www.maximumpc.com/print/5491
This is pretty much a human Water Wiggle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D_WdavMuKs
Those Hadron folks had nothing to do with this particular time travel.
It's Slashdot editors testing their new 'Dupes from the future' technology.
Hmm. So that makes Harriot a Guitar Hero of science?
Ugh. Sounds like scientists just discovered my last blind date.
The Center should open about the time Bush moves back to Texas, so the Law of Conservation of Intelligence will hold.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW!!!!!!!!!
GOOD!!! OUCH!!!! (as a fist-powered brickbat comes crashing down on his head)
They weren't dense, Windows DE (Depression Edition) kept crashing that day with repeated PCODs (Punch Cards of Death).
Though now that I think about it, I've come to the realization that every version of Windows is Windows DE.
Tivo.
Clearly it's orgy porn.
"That deaf, dumb and blind kid sure plays a mean guitar..." as Pinball Wizard plays in Guitar Hero.
... a video game for blind people?
Though an audio game might be pretty cool - something like wearing headphones while playing Battlezone with really loud tanks.
Or maybe an audio only version of Leisure Suit Larry. Giggety.
If by "better" you mean having a chance to enter a vagina, then... No.
C'mon - say it like a marketing spinmeister: Duke Nuke'em forever has sold every copy ever made, and we forecast zero excess channel inventory for at least another few quarters. Furthermore, consumer satisfaction has been so high, that we've not had even one return.
Clever post, but check out this subtle fact: the authors are absolutely practicing what they preached in that very article:
market segmentation: you get the watered down summary for free, but have to pay for a journal subscription to get the actual article
market seeding: give this version away for free (and I suspect that they'll even send a .pdf of their related working papers) in hopes of capturing customers for the more expensive version (a.k.a. attending their b-schools, or hiring them on as consultants).
In reality though, academic theorists are absolutely the most open source colleagues I've ever had. As long as you adequately cite them, you'll be their bestest friend if you embrace and extend their material. When tenure and promotion decisions are to be made, b-school deans might not be so savvy as to know how good your publications are, but they can easily see how often you work has been cited. Don Jacobs, former dean of Kellogg, said it best, "Maybe we can't read, but we can definitely count."
The slashdot summary author (mjasay) appears to see the world through a lens which makes the developers of open source software victims of some nasty MBA conspiracy.
The academics who wrote the underlying article go out of their way to say that their writings are not a 'how to' manual for MBAs, and that open source software is only one example.
The article is simply a recent take on 'How to compete with free,' an important MBA marketing topic for decades. 'How to compete with free' can be considered a subset of how to compete in general, and the gist of any marketing solution to 'how to compete' will be based on building value in the product.
One method to build value is to increase switching cost through lock-in. Even free / advertising supported services do this: my.yahoo, iTunes, gmail, hotmail and countless others.
If you read the underlying academic article, you just might notice that most of the tools presented now are analogous to the tools presented at Sanford in the early nineties to the MBAs who eventually went on to Coke and Pepsi to fight the scourge of FOSW (Free Open Source Water).
Open source water survived just fine. As long as open source software continues to offer value, it will continue to thrive.
Marketing is marketing. MBA courses are MBA courses. Same shit, different year.
No USB drive compatibility, but instant on.
The love of newspaper field reporters for decades:
http://oldcomputers.net/trs100.html
Not bad for 1983.
But in a very measured way.