Did you look at the post? I only highlighted one bit, and that was what I was responding to. His comment of "At least they'll be right some of the time" is a poor justification of a source.
As to Wikipedia, I think it makes a terrible source, but a nice reference. As a repository of knowledge it is undependable as many well known failures prove. But the citations allow you to do some real research. The problem is the people that don't finish up by doing the research.
First, I am not disagreeing with you. I am just pointing out that we are having a discussion on an article most of us have not read. That is the problem. How many times are goofy comments here responded to with "Read the article?" It used to be that facts were born out by research, and now it is by consensus. (Like "The world is flat...") And the Wikipedia issue is just more of this in another place. Read the wiki, and do not check the sources...
And no I did not read the article. It was locked behind a fee. It does sound interesting, however.
houstonbofh, the point of the discussion there is not the article, as actually the people there even say they didn't read the article. The discussion is about wikipedia's, and people in general, relation to truth today, which is decided by popularity. Similar as here in slashdot by choosing which comments get shown and not.
And about people basing knowledge on summeries without checking the source information. My comment was about people getting bumped up for providing information that links to hidden source material, and no one notices. No one actually checks the facts anymore, (Investigative journalism my ass) and it is coming back to bite us.
A link to a teaser summery that references and article that requires a paid subscription... And it is somehow marked informative. Good example of the problem here.
No. I am saying that both numbers are demonstrably wrong. Just as is the statement that "Vista is the best selling Windows ever" is wrong in spirit, and a similar BlurRay statement is also wrong.
Going back and reading it, I guess I was a tad unclear on my theoretical cabin.:) But change it to boat, motorhome, or farm in the sticks... There are many people that are communicationally challenged, and will not understand why this expensive piece of junk doesn't work. My father, for example does not have a phone line in his media room. Did not want one when he built it. Now what?
neither side is able to consistently gain the upper hand
That's an understatement. Fair use is still grossly inconvenient and/or illegal, and copyright infringement is practically unhindered. It looks to me like both sides are losing.
Quote of the century here. When will they stop beating on there own customers while the pirates laugh at them?
(*) A good sign that they do not is this old Redbook CD-DA Logo. Manufacturers are only allowed to put it on if they adhere to the spec. DRM is a spec violation, so no logo!
A number of major labels have decided to no longer put the logo on their packaging even when the disc conforms to Redbook specifications.
With people this incredibly dumb, it is amazing that they can still manage to effectively bribe congress.
Until the average person knows that he is caught in the RIAA net too, he won't care, and nothing will change.
Since the average person probably isn't sharing copyrighted material, he probably won't have anything to fear from the RIAA.
It was not pirates caught with the Sony Rootkit. The non-technical grandfather, and the dead grandmother were not pirates. The license fee for the DRM on every BD disk sold is not payed by Pirates. The criminalization of p2p, even for legal purposes, is payed by more than pirates. Everyone is forced to watch that damned "Do not pirate me" add on legally purchased DVDs. (But not pirates)
That article counted the PS3 separately, however. In reality, there are significantly more BD players than HD-DVD players, counting the PS3.
But it considers intent. Microsoft counts a Dell with the XP downgrade option as a Vista sale, for example. So while every PS3 will not be used as a BlueRay player, every HD-DVD player will be used as an HD-DVD player.
But what will you do when they stop offering alternative and this turns into "the only game in Town"?
Never. They make a lot of money from DVD, and there is no promise that all that would go to BD if they killed it. Also you have online and cable as options. Add Tivo and you have many viable alternatives to BD. (And there is stealing it)
Why limit to Linux? I have only see one guy actually play a BlueRay on a big screen in full resolution with a Computer. Normally some part of the computer protests, and you are downscaled. The funny part is that some people don't notice! So a increase in cost, and complexity for a quality difference that many people won't notice unless they are looking for it. We got a winner here!
If BlueRay gets popular enough for people to want to play it on computers, a FOSS BlueRay player for Linux will appear. Until then, they are working on projects that are a problem now.
Blu-ray seems more geared to the studios; their trailers, their encryption, etc.; than to the person actually BUYING the disc. It's like the studios invented blu-ray just to piss people off and turn them off to the whole idea of a HD video format.
They invented Blu-Ray to fully monetize the high-def video market, which includes all those things in the first sentence.
That is funny. I thought you needed customers to fully monetize something.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahhh... I get your point. But I was making a different one. :)
Did you look at the post? I only highlighted one bit, and that was what I was responding to. His comment of "At least they'll be right some of the time" is a poor justification of a source.
As to Wikipedia, I think it makes a terrible source, but a nice reference. As a repository of knowledge it is undependable as many well known failures prove. But the citations allow you to do some real research. The problem is the people that don't finish up by doing the research.
Just don't think about transmission losses... Those pesky realities mess up perfectly good theories.
First, I am not disagreeing with you. I am just pointing out that we are having a discussion on an article most of us have not read. That is the problem. How many times are goofy comments here responded to with "Read the article?" It used to be that facts were born out by research, and now it is by consensus. (Like "The world is flat...") And the Wikipedia issue is just more of this in another place. Read the wiki, and do not check the sources...
And no I did not read the article. It was locked behind a fee. It does sound interesting, however.
houstonbofh, the point of the discussion there is not the article, as actually the people there even say they didn't read the article. The discussion is about wikipedia's, and people in general, relation to truth today, which is decided by popularity. Similar as here in slashdot by choosing which comments get shown and not.
And about people basing knowledge on summeries without checking the source information. My comment was about people getting bumped up for providing information that links to hidden source material, and no one notices. No one actually checks the facts anymore, (Investigative journalism my ass) and it is coming back to bite us.
I'd rather have them look stuff up on Wikipedia than not do any research at all, I suppose. At least they'll be right some of the time.
So is a broken clock.
And this is not meant as a joke.
A link to a teaser summery that references and article that requires a paid subscription... And it is somehow marked informative. Good example of the problem here.
No. I am saying that both numbers are demonstrably wrong. Just as is the statement that "Vista is the best selling Windows ever" is wrong in spirit, and a similar BlurRay statement is also wrong.
You mean after the PS4? Well, OK I am with you on that.
Going back and reading it, I guess I was a tad unclear on my theoretical cabin. :) But change it to boat, motorhome, or farm in the sticks... There are many people that are communicationally challenged, and will not understand why this expensive piece of junk doesn't work. My father, for example does not have a phone line in his media room. Did not want one when he built it. Now what?
neither side is able to consistently gain the upper hand
That's an understatement. Fair use is still grossly inconvenient and/or illegal, and copyright infringement is practically unhindered. It looks to me like both sides are losing.
Quote of the century here. When will they stop beating on there own customers while the pirates laugh at them?
A lot of the cheap players only do BD 1.0, so when the DRM war ratchets up, they will not play new content.
I would gladly pay for HD content that will play on my Linux systems. Quite a lot, actually. But they don't sell that.
A number of major labels have decided to no longer put the logo on their packaging even when the disc conforms to Redbook specifications.
With people this incredibly dumb, it is amazing that they can still manage to effectively bribe congress.
Until the average person knows that he is caught in the RIAA net too, he won't care, and nothing will change. Since the average person probably isn't sharing copyrighted material, he probably won't have anything to fear from the RIAA.
It was not pirates caught with the Sony Rootkit. The non-technical grandfather, and the dead grandmother were not pirates. The license fee for the DRM on every BD disk sold is not payed by Pirates. The criminalization of p2p, even for legal purposes, is payed by more than pirates. Everyone is forced to watch that damned "Do not pirate me" add on legally purchased DVDs. (But not pirates)
That article counted the PS3 separately, however. In reality, there are significantly more BD players than HD-DVD players, counting the PS3.
But it considers intent. Microsoft counts a Dell with the XP downgrade option as a Vista sale, for example. So while every PS3 will not be used as a BlueRay player, every HD-DVD player will be used as an HD-DVD player.
There have been several months this year where HD-DVD outsold BD by a significant margin. For a dead guy, he looks pretty good. :)
But what will you do when they stop offering alternative and this turns into "the only game in Town"?
Never. They make a lot of money from DVD, and there is no promise that all that would go to BD if they killed it. Also you have online and cable as options. Add Tivo and you have many viable alternatives to BD. (And there is stealing it)
Why limit to Linux? I have only see one guy actually play a BlueRay on a big screen in full resolution with a Computer. Normally some part of the computer protests, and you are downscaled. The funny part is that some people don't notice! So a increase in cost, and complexity for a quality difference that many people won't notice unless they are looking for it. We got a winner here!
If BlueRay gets popular enough for people to want to play it on computers, a FOSS BlueRay player for Linux will appear. Until then, they are working on projects that are a problem now.
It is HPs fault for providing a non-working package. Take it back.
Blu-ray seems more geared to the studios; their trailers, their encryption, etc.; than to the person actually BUYING the disc. It's like the studios invented blu-ray just to piss people off and turn them off to the whole idea of a HD video format.
They invented Blu-Ray to fully monetize the high-def video market, which includes all those things in the first sentence.
That is funny. I thought you needed customers to fully monetize something.
And will the cheap BlueRay 1.0 players support this new per movie program DRM? Ooops...
Hah, I doubt that such a lawsuit would get very far.
Just look at the rootkit lawsuit.
You mean the one that they settled? http://www.google.com/search?q=sony+rootkit+lawsuit OK. I can deal with them removing the DRM from BlueRay. :)
Which is really nice for my vacation cabin up in the woods with no cell internet access. Not all places have, or want internet access.