On the other hand, those guys are generally bought-and-paid for, and many corporations seem to feel that it's in their best interests never to be seen losing.
No sane judge would issue such a sentence, though.
True enough, I suppose, but the problem with the modern American Justice system is that it is a crapshoot. You never know what you're facing when you enter the courtroom. Worse, in a situation such as this one, you can't depend upon anyone else in the room having a grasp of the technological underpinnings of your case, even if you do.
The answer? Portable HDDs and sharing them around your with your friends:)
In truth, I think you're right about that. Peer-to-peer served to get massive collections of music into the hands of, well, the masses. Now there are millions upon millions of 50+ Gb private stashes out there. The biggest threat the music industry is facing is the large, portable hard drive... whether it's in an iPod or not. I mean, in the time it takes to grab a few tunes from Limewire you can jack in a portable USB drive and commit copyright infringement on a Biblical scale.
On the other hand, the reality is that the big studios control the vast majority of artists and industry money, and those are the ones who need to be tarred (and feathered.) I understand that generalizations can be dangerous. However, I think you can safely assume, at least here on Slashdot, that when negative references are made about the music industry, it is the big boys to whom we are referring. The folks that run those operations are, by and large, lying bastards who deserve no sympathy whatsoever, and who have all the warmth and humanity of a cockroach. I've seen very few complaints about independent operations, who have to actually compete and consequently treat their suppliers with a bit more respect.
He can have him. Personally, I have no use for that baldheaded Peter Boyle clone. Or McCain either, for that matter, and if had ever considered voting for the man I certainly wouldn't now.
Your problem, Guido, is that you're dealing with people who have an emotional stake in the GPL and open source in general. If they were entirely rational on the subject, they'd accept that a. it has faults and limitations because if it didn't, there'd be no need for a V3 and b. by definition the GPL does apply certain restrictions in exchange for certain privileges. That tradeoff may or may not be "good" depending upon a developer's intent when releasing software, but people should choose their licensing scheme with open eyes.
In any event, what I took from your comments was that that so-called "freedom" of GPL'ed software comes with a price. It does, and it's a price that many are perfectly willing to pay, but you should know that you're paying it.
The story is that the actual contributions made to these Congresspeople by media corporations far exceeds the amounts shown. The MPAA is known for having friendly law firms make donations to their cause.. they weaseled around the regulations that way, and still got the law they wanted.
But you're right in the sense that total amount of campaign contributions received by all of Congress is a drop in the bucket, compared to the amount of money the movie and music industries rake in. And that amount is a pittance in comparison to the economic harm companies and individuals in unrelated fields have had to suffer just so a few media conglomerates can hang on to their distribution schemes. Makes me want to throw up.
All I'm saying is that for solar to work, it has to be no more expensive than what it's replacing.
I dunno. Applying Guilder's Law, if you want to replace the incumbent technology the new must be roughly an order of magnitude "better" in order to justify the economic investment. Solar needs to be substantially cheaper than conventional power sources for adoption to occur. It won't automatically happen just because solar power becomes merely competitive with existing infrastructure. Make no mistake, for solar to have significant impact we're talking an investment of many billions of dollars... no small potatoes, and there are many hidden costs that go along with such a change that aren't reflected in the cost-per-watt rating of the solar cells themselves.
Government could upset the historical applecart by forcing the issue in some way, or by providing incentives to "go solar", or maybe subsidizing the manufacture of solar systems (although that would likely work out as well as methanol subsidies. Ha.) I don't really trust Congress to be able to do anything rational in this regard, and whatever plan they came up with would probably be worse than waiting for the private sector to figure it out.
I consider nuclear to be conventional.
And it probably would be considered such in most nations outside the U.S. that use it, England and France for example. We have such an unreasoning anti-nuclear bias in country that I have to wonder if it was orchestrated somehow (although one should never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity.) Yes, I know, it's largely a relic of the environmental craziness of the sixties: in the previous decade the potential of "atomic power" was looked upon with awe and respect. Too bad that possibly well-meaning but misguided "environmental activists" gave us such a dour outlook on the subject. If they'd found something more productive to focus on (such as coal-fired plants) we'd be in a much better position, energy-wise, than we are today. But let's face it, "No Nukes! No Nukes!" makes a much better rallying cry than "No Carbon! No Carbon!"
Anyone know of any studies comparing the commissioning costs of, say, a 2400 MW nuclear power plant with an equivalent solar facility? Nuclear power is the most energy-dense solution we currently have: solar is diffuse in comparison. That much energy would require an enormous solar facility with massive storage.
We've been using it for several decades, and the only real accident of consequence (Chernobyl) was the result of a shitty design that nobody in their right mind would touch combined with immense stupidity on the part of the operators.
Yeah, and let us not forget that the Russians built their containment after the fact.
High-temperature superconductors are being used for power transmission... isn't New York rolling out a new grid using the stuff? I think there was a Slashdot article about that a week or so ago. A significant quantity of energy will be saved in a city-sized grid just from lack of I2R losses.
Yeah, no kidding. "Hysterical" is right, and I don't mean in the comedic sense. I remember Jack Valenti's impassioned pleas against the VCR in the days before Sony vs. Universal... "it will destroy the motion picture industry!" Pure hyperbole worthy of a Steve Ballmer. Remember his complaint about how piracy was putting a financial hurt on the rank-and-file movie production people? He was referring to the median salary of the people working on movies in Hollywood: "A hundred thousand dollars year, that's not much to live on." Not by his standards, maybe. Ordinarily I would never speak ill of the dead, but frankly I'm glad that arrogant ass is an historical footnote. Now, if we could just convince some of his friends and associates to die as well, we'd all be a whole lot better off.
The media companies have always been against any new technology that in any way threatened their existing distribution systems. The player piano, audio and video cassettes, the CD, DAT and DVD... if it was writable they were against it. Always have been. Fortunately for the pace of technological progress in the past century or so they didn't wield anywhere near the political and legal power they currently have: it's going to be an uphill battle from this point onward to actually achieve any significant progress in consumer electronics. Hell, fortunately for their own bottom lines it's a good thing they weren't in a position to sabotage new developments, because they've made untold billions from the sale of such media. Of course, they don't see it that way.
Vista is a perfect example of what an operating system designed to keep a media mogul happy looks like: whether it's capable of keeping the consumer happy is another question entirely.
Numb3rs is a rather well-produced series about two brothers, one a mathematician and the other an FBI agent. I understand that academics from some major universities act as consultants for the show, in order to assure that the math used to help solve crimes is legitimate, and that the scientists themselves are portrayed fairly. I'd never heard of "tit for tat" in this context until they used it in a recent episode.
That book does look interesting. Thanks for the recommendation.
Does this mean that IBM, HP, GE and others owe billions to American engineers when they imported cheap (but genuine) foreign workers into the country?
Yes, indeed it does, and it's not just the engineers. Don't expect them to pay up any time soon, though, and I think you meant "... imported cheap (but genuinely foreign) workers..."
Apparently you also watched the episode of Numb3rs a couple of weeks ago where Agent Epps was negotiating with an assassin to convince him to give up the location of a body.
Slashdot Mirror
that needs to take a course in the history of science and technology.
favor Adam Osborne's policy
As customers go, so do I, but then again, as computer makers go, Gateway is still around and Osborne Computer isn't.
Congress is far more dangerous to the citizens of this great nation than the Internet will ever be. Period.
that some people get it, and some people don't, and the degree to which you "get it" depends upon how happy you are with the status-quo.
On the other hand, those guys are generally bought-and-paid for, and many corporations seem to feel that it's in their best interests never to be seen losing.
No sane judge would issue such a sentence, though.
True enough, I suppose, but the problem with the modern American Justice system is that it is a crapshoot. You never know what you're facing when you enter the courtroom. Worse, in a situation such as this one, you can't depend upon anyone else in the room having a grasp of the technological underpinnings of your case, even if you do.
The answer? Portable HDDs and sharing them around your with your friends :)
... whether it's in an iPod or not. I mean, in the time it takes to grab a few tunes from Limewire you can jack in a portable USB drive and commit copyright infringement on a Biblical scale.
In truth, I think you're right about that. Peer-to-peer served to get massive collections of music into the hands of, well, the masses. Now there are millions upon millions of 50+ Gb private stashes out there. The biggest threat the music industry is facing is the large, portable hard drive
Sneakernet isn't dead: it just got bigger guns.
clearly see that it is superceded
I think superseeding is what got that guy in trouble in the first place.
Hopefully, it will earn him a jury of his peers.
On the other hand, the reality is that the big studios control the vast majority of artists and industry money, and those are the ones who need to be tarred (and feathered.) I understand that generalizations can be dangerous. However, I think you can safely assume, at least here on Slashdot, that when negative references are made about the music industry, it is the big boys to whom we are referring. The folks that run those operations are, by and large, lying bastards who deserve no sympathy whatsoever, and who have all the warmth and humanity of a cockroach. I've seen very few complaints about independent operations, who have to actually compete and consequently treat their suppliers with a bit more respect.
Media Server: n. A euphamism for digital porn storage.
Only if you make all your network file shares pubic.
Ballmer may be well known, but he should be thrown into a pool of sharks, not into a government office.
While I agree with your sentiment, I'm not sure that throwing him into the Microsoft legal department would do any good.
McCain Wants Ballmer For His Cabinet
He can have him. Personally, I have no use for that baldheaded Peter Boyle clone. Or McCain either, for that matter, and if had ever considered voting for the man I certainly wouldn't now.
Your problem, Guido, is that you're dealing with people who have an emotional stake in the GPL and open source in general. If they were entirely rational on the subject, they'd accept that a. it has faults and limitations because if it didn't, there'd be no need for a V3 and b. by definition the GPL does apply certain restrictions in exchange for certain privileges. That tradeoff may or may not be "good" depending upon a developer's intent when releasing software, but people should choose their licensing scheme with open eyes.
In any event, what I took from your comments was that that so-called "freedom" of GPL'ed software comes with a price. It does, and it's a price that many are perfectly willing to pay, but you should know that you're paying it.
The story is that the actual contributions made to these Congresspeople by media corporations far exceeds the amounts shown. The MPAA is known for having friendly law firms make donations to their cause .. they weaseled around the regulations that way, and still got the law they wanted.
But you're right in the sense that total amount of campaign contributions received by all of Congress is a drop in the bucket, compared to the amount of money the movie and music industries rake in. And that amount is a pittance in comparison to the economic harm companies and individuals in unrelated fields have had to suffer just so a few media conglomerates can hang on to their distribution schemes. Makes me want to throw up.
All I'm saying is that for solar to work, it has to be no more expensive than what it's replacing.
... no small potatoes, and there are many hidden costs that go along with such a change that aren't reflected in the cost-per-watt rating of the solar cells themselves.
I dunno. Applying Guilder's Law, if you want to replace the incumbent technology the new must be roughly an order of magnitude "better" in order to justify the economic investment. Solar needs to be substantially cheaper than conventional power sources for adoption to occur. It won't automatically happen just because solar power becomes merely competitive with existing infrastructure. Make no mistake, for solar to have significant impact we're talking an investment of many billions of dollars
Government could upset the historical applecart by forcing the issue in some way, or by providing incentives to "go solar", or maybe subsidizing the manufacture of solar systems (although that would likely work out as well as methanol subsidies. Ha.) I don't really trust Congress to be able to do anything rational in this regard, and whatever plan they came up with would probably be worse than waiting for the private sector to figure it out.
I consider nuclear to be conventional.
And it probably would be considered such in most nations outside the U.S. that use it, England and France for example. We have such an unreasoning anti-nuclear bias in country that I have to wonder if it was orchestrated somehow (although one should never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity.) Yes, I know, it's largely a relic of the environmental craziness of the sixties: in the previous decade the potential of "atomic power" was looked upon with awe and respect. Too bad that possibly well-meaning but misguided "environmental activists" gave us such a dour outlook on the subject. If they'd found something more productive to focus on (such as coal-fired plants) we'd be in a much better position, energy-wise, than we are today. But let's face it, "No Nukes! No Nukes!" makes a much better rallying cry than "No Carbon! No Carbon!"
Anyone know of any studies comparing the commissioning costs of, say, a 2400 MW nuclear power plant with an equivalent solar facility? Nuclear power is the most energy-dense solution we currently have: solar is diffuse in comparison. That much energy would require an enormous solar facility with massive storage.
We've been using it for several decades, and the only real accident of consequence (Chernobyl) was the result of a shitty design that nobody in their right mind would touch combined with immense stupidity on the part of the operators.
Yeah, and let us not forget that the Russians built their containment after the fact.
High-temperature superconductors are being used for power transmission ... isn't New York rolling out a new grid using the stuff? I think there was a Slashdot article about that a week or so ago. A significant quantity of energy will be saved in a city-sized grid just from lack of I2R losses.
Yes but you don't need dirt for algae.
No-one thinks outside of a box. Some of us just have a larger box.
Moonshine? you have got to be kidding me!
That's because the DSL modem support only works with Speakeasy.
If convicted as charged, Soloway will face a maximum sentence of more than 65 years in prison and a fine of 250,000 dollars.
... I guess it's a good thing he didn't murder anyone. He might have gotten a really stiff sentence.
But, damn
No no, you're confusing "GoDaddy" with "HoDaddy".
Yeah, no kidding. "Hysterical" is right, and I don't mean in the comedic sense. I remember Jack Valenti's impassioned pleas against the VCR in the days before Sony vs. Universal ... "it will destroy the motion picture industry!" Pure hyperbole worthy of a Steve Ballmer. Remember his complaint about how piracy was putting a financial hurt on the rank-and-file movie production people? He was referring to the median salary of the people working on movies in Hollywood: "A hundred thousand dollars year, that's not much to live on." Not by his standards, maybe. Ordinarily I would never speak ill of the dead, but frankly I'm glad that arrogant ass is an historical footnote. Now, if we could just convince some of his friends and associates to die as well, we'd all be a whole lot better off.
... if it was writable they were against it. Always have been. Fortunately for the pace of technological progress in the past century or so they didn't wield anywhere near the political and legal power they currently have: it's going to be an uphill battle from this point onward to actually achieve any significant progress in consumer electronics. Hell, fortunately for their own bottom lines it's a good thing they weren't in a position to sabotage new developments, because they've made untold billions from the sale of such media. Of course, they don't see it that way.
The media companies have always been against any new technology that in any way threatened their existing distribution systems. The player piano, audio and video cassettes, the CD, DAT and DVD
Vista is a perfect example of what an operating system designed to keep a media mogul happy looks like: whether it's capable of keeping the consumer happy is another question entirely.
Numb3rs is a rather well-produced series about two brothers, one a mathematician and the other an FBI agent. I understand that academics from some major universities act as consultants for the show, in order to assure that the math used to help solve crimes is legitimate, and that the scientists themselves are portrayed fairly. I'd never heard of "tit for tat" in this context until they used it in a recent episode.
That book does look interesting. Thanks for the recommendation.
Does this mean that IBM, HP, GE and others owe billions to American engineers when they imported cheap (but genuine) foreign workers into the country?
..."
Yes, indeed it does, and it's not just the engineers. Don't expect them to pay up any time soon, though, and I think you meant "... imported cheap (but genuinely foreign) workers
Apparently you also watched the episode of Numb3rs a couple of weeks ago where Agent Epps was negotiating with an assassin to convince him to give up the location of a body.