Yet since a "season" is whatever Fox makes it to be... they could simply have had an 18-month "season" to accomidate some of the episodes finishing late. Really, this was a threat by Fox to lower the episode count for next season and every season thereafter from the present count of 22 in order to cheapen the overall value of the contract. Shows like Friends, ER and NYPD Blue have started a trend of producing only 16-18 episodes a year of hit shows because hit shows tend to get expensive in their latter years because the talent demands more money.
In that context, 24 can be seen as a groundbreaking show because it forces the network to buy complete seasons of 24 episodes, they can't half-renew or partial renew the show.
The cover-up was also done because they wanted to include the names of the teams that were playing in the game that day... which is only a 2-week lead time that the animators couldn't possibly deal with any other way.
That's likely because whatever radio station you were listening to has some sort of audio processing equipment in the "audio chain" between the studio switchboard and the broadcast tower. Most radio stations adjust things like bass and reverb so that their format of music sounds better than against a flat equalization.
TV stations, even though they have the same equipment available to them, don't do that because talk sounds best with a flat equalization, and that's what they're doing most of the time.
On in the post 9/11/01 days, a lot of music-format radio stations suddenly dumped their regular programming to air network news coverage of the events. A lot of FM music stations got exposed for what they were doing to the music, because there was often an AM talk station that had the same program which could be used as a reference. Several stations toned down their processing so that if they ever have go to flip to news again it would not sound as ugly.
These people already have enough money to retire and not need to work again while living nicely... so their personal comfort is no longer any incentive to work.
However, they're still accumulating money for the future of their family... and they're also well aware that News Corp.'s money making machine from The Simpsons would start slowing down if all of them were not to come back to the show.
That's their reason to hold out... they want their fair cut of the profits, because even though all of them are rich beyond their wildest dreams, that still doesn't make getting taken advantage of feel any better.
The Simpson's money-making machine is an interesting study in how the content industry has re-alligned.
- 20th Century Fox is the production studio. - The show's new episodes have been purchased by the Fox Network. (Fox was the first US TV network to share common ownership with a movie/TV production studio. The The ABC-Disney Merger, the CBS-Viacom Merger, and the creation of the United Paramount Network and The Warner Bros. Network all came later.) - The show's syndicated episodes from prior seasons are distributed by 20th Cenutry Fox. (Networks used to be forbidden to participate in the syndication market. During that time, off-network reruns needed to be packaged by a seperate syndication company, or distributed by the production company. This rule was striken before this rule applied to Fox.) - In most major markets, the show's syndicated reruns are puchased by the Fox Station Group. (In recent years, the laws have changed to allow there to be more such network-owned stations than before because fo a raising of the station ownership limits for a single company.) - In many places, the syndicated reruns air during the 7:00 hour. (This would have been blocked by Prime Time Access Rule, but the rule never applied to Fox and was striken rather than modifed to include Fox as a network.)
In short... several of the steps in The Simpsons money-making machine would have been illegal in the 1970s. I'm not saying that The Simpsons wouldn't have existed under those rules, but the show would be a whole lot less profitable, and the profits would land in more hands than just the bottom line at News Corp.
Just so everybody's clear on this... a four-year contract with the actors doesn't indicate that the show has been promised four more years. TV actor contracts always are conditional on the show going on. So, what this contract means is that the production studio and the actors have agreed on the pay rate table to be used for the next four years, assuming the show goes on that long. If The Simpsons goes five more years into a 20th season, the actors and studio will need to go back to the table to talk money again.
So, as long as the show keeps going, we can be sure that there's going to be no major cast defections over the next four years.
A CEO doesn't always have to represent the views of his whole company... he's allowed to have personal political views too.
I seriously doubt Diebold as an entire operation wants to be unfair. However, it's a bit disturbing that the CEO of such an operation shows such strong political views to the public because it makes us think that he'd be more willing to cover up a discovered problem with his system than to admit to it...
I agree that the "grand conspiracy" theory that Diebold is actively trying to sweep Republicans into power is a bit much...
However, Diebold played right into those people's hands with what they did, running an uncertified product which skipped all of the checking processes that were in place to make sure that nobody is attempt to cheat the system. The first set of canaries in this mine are dead... we shouldn't allow this operation to go any further because once they go arround the certification process, there isn't really much more needed to taint the vote counts and get away with it.
Worse than just having an apparent interest in the outcome of the elections, Diebold managed to trip over the safety valves that are supposed to make sure no company can tamper with the results for any reason.
The software they ran, everywhere in the state, on election day was not the version that they submitted for certification. You just can't skip these kinds of checks and expect to be treated like your software is honest, because these reviews exist because we're just not going to take anybody's word for it.
At best, they cut a corner they weren't allowed to. But worse yet, they undermine their credibility in claiming that we can trust that they're not going to attempt to fix what is likely to be an extremely close election in November.
The only elections that this flawed system had been used for in California were the presidential primary elections. The Republican Party had no credible challenger to Bush, so his renomination will be nothing but a formality. The Democratic Primary was contested, but the eventual nominee of John Kerry has enough support to still be nominated even if California's votes turned out to be unacceptable.
Diebold's systems haven't yet had an election of enough importance to cause much trouble yet. And it looks like they're now not going to get the chance...
A quick thought on overvoting. This is an "error" that should be available. It indicates that you don't agree with any of the canidates, and unlike an "undervote" this cannot be argued as voter error later.
Error conditions should always be avoided. If a voter truely wants to not vote in a race, they should be asked to fill in an oval that indicates such.
In some places in the world, a "None of the above" or "None of those listed" option is on the ballot in what is called a "Turkey Ballot" format. Basically, if the non-option should obtain a specfied in the rules number that indicates a critical mass, the election must be reheld, but all of those who appeared on the ballot in the first vote are disqualified because voters have declared them all turkeys. The parties are basically each being told to nominate somebody else because the voters didn't like any of the options they were presented with.
These "oversized car crusher" robots wouldn't make for very interesting battlebots competition... they are all one-trick operations... pick up car, crush car, put car in mouth like hole, activate flame-thrower display.
News for Nerds...
on
Robosaurus
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Clearly the "Stuff that matters" bin is a little empty tonight if this made Slashdot...
Believe it or not, quite a few people go to airshows. And these people are a prime audience for a lot of advertising. So most of the performers are in their own business, and all the Air Force/Navy does is provide them a runway for a weekend. And Robosaurus is one of those. So no, your tax dollars were not spent on this thing.
The Air Force and Navy are happy to host such events on their property, because the crowd these events tends to attract includes a lot of young males who are interested in machinery... a perfect demographic group for miliatary recruiters to advertize in front of. So for them, they consider it a fair trade.
As for the opt out. It only takes one person who says they asked to be taken off and wern't....
Unfortunately, the standard is not that low.
It only takes one person who can submit proof that they complied with Richter's opt-out instructions to indicate that they wished to be taken off, and weren't.
Just saying you tried isn't enough... you have to have requested and requested correctly.
It doesn't matter if the box starts at yes, starts at no... or if there is no box at all and the terms on the form simply says that by submitting the form you're agreeing...
You have to be taking a proactive action by filling out and submitting the form. That's enough to make it opt in.
Good. Then write up an affidavit, and send it to the Spamcop folks to help them in their lawsuit. Seriously. Mentioning it on/. won't do anything.
And don't forget request that the court keep the e-mail address you mention in that affidavit under seal... otherwise it won't just be published on one website anymore.
Re:This one makes me laugh and cry at the same tim
on
Spammer Sues SpamCop
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Richter's actually using a legal principle that the anti-SCO people are also using.
When somebody goes walking around spreading FUD against you, saying that you're breaking the law and are going to get sued... you can go to court and effectively file their lawsuit against you for them. You basically sue them seeking either the FUD-spreaders shutting up, or them actually filing the lawsuit and going forward with it.
Richter's claiming SpamCop's spreading FUD against him, the same way SCO is spreading FUD agaisnt Linux users... just because the majority opinion of somebody is low here at Slashdot doesn't take away their rights in court.
Collect the facts you have, make darned sure they are all 100%, hand them to SpamCop. They use it in this suit to disprove the "they just dont remember" statement ( 1 counterexample disproves a claim... ). Be ready to testify.
Be ready to testify. When doing so, be ready to state your name, phyiscal address, and e-mail address for the public record...
So the non-Richter spammers can then pick up your e-mail address off that record... talk about a can't win situation!
That seems to be a valid contact address, but that's not their Opt-Out address.
The only place they have to publish their Opt-Out intructions is at the end of every e-mail they send. Can't tell the difference between Richter's e-mails and the other not-law-compliant spamemrs? That's your problem...
Yep, opting in is so easy you can do it without realizing you did. Opting out is so hard you have to strugle to get it done and will often fall into the trap of verifying that you read spam e-mail.
Oh, and you kill your spam before you read it? Oh well, you'll also end up killing the ever elusive opt-out info.
Somehow, this CAN-SPAM law isn't quite what we wanted in an anti-spam law...
That address STILL gets Richter's spam-crap. Just like every other spammer out there, he's a liar, a thief (ripping off the people paying him to advertise), and deserves to be gotten rid of.
Are you sure it's really Richter's spam-crap you're getting, rather than somebody else's spam-crap? You've got to be sure you're accusing the right people when you go accusing...
Re:How can he hope to win this suit?
on
Spammer Sues SpamCop
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Isn't that a lot like suing the credit reporting companies because you went bankrupt and they put you on their "do not extend credit" list? You could call it "tortious interference" with your ability to get a credit card or a mortgage.
I think that's been tried many times and hasn't worked. Why would this?
Because the credit card company can show up in court with contracts that indicate you really did agree to pay that debt, and then you didn't. They can spread bad facts about you because they can bring supporting documents that stand behind those facts.
Unfortately... you can't exactly prove the negative that says you never did opt in to get Ricter's e-mails. In fact, if you're willing to give him your e-mail address, he'll gladly tell you when and where you agreed that he could send you e-mail about anything he wants to. And if you send him a proper unsubscribe request, he really will unsubscribe you.
One bullet-proof defense to all complaints of slander and libel is "It's true!". However, if you can't prove the truth of that statement, you're not going to get to use that defense.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet since a "season" is whatever Fox makes it to be... they could simply have had an 18-month "season" to accomidate some of the episodes finishing late. Really, this was a threat by Fox to lower the episode count for next season and every season thereafter from the present count of 22 in order to cheapen the overall value of the contract. Shows like Friends, ER and NYPD Blue have started a trend of producing only 16-18 episodes a year of hit shows because hit shows tend to get expensive in their latter years because the talent demands more money.
In that context, 24 can be seen as a groundbreaking show because it forces the network to buy complete seasons of 24 episodes, they can't half-renew or partial renew the show.
The cover-up was also done because they wanted to include the names of the teams that were playing in the game that day... which is only a 2-week lead time that the animators couldn't possibly deal with any other way.
That's likely because whatever radio station you were listening to has some sort of audio processing equipment in the "audio chain" between the studio switchboard and the broadcast tower. Most radio stations adjust things like bass and reverb so that their format of music sounds better than against a flat equalization.
TV stations, even though they have the same equipment available to them, don't do that because talk sounds best with a flat equalization, and that's what they're doing most of the time.
On in the post 9/11/01 days, a lot of music-format radio stations suddenly dumped their regular programming to air network news coverage of the events. A lot of FM music stations got exposed for what they were doing to the music, because there was often an AM talk station that had the same program which could be used as a reference. Several stations toned down their processing so that if they ever have go to flip to news again it would not sound as ugly.
These people already have enough money to retire and not need to work again while living nicely... so their personal comfort is no longer any incentive to work.
However, they're still accumulating money for the future of their family... and they're also well aware that News Corp.'s money making machine from The Simpsons would start slowing down if all of them were not to come back to the show.
That's their reason to hold out... they want their fair cut of the profits, because even though all of them are rich beyond their wildest dreams, that still doesn't make getting taken advantage of feel any better.
The Simpson's money-making machine is an interesting study in how the content industry has re-alligned.
- 20th Century Fox is the production studio.
- The show's new episodes have been purchased by the Fox Network. (Fox was the first US TV network to share common ownership with a movie/TV production studio. The The ABC-Disney Merger, the CBS-Viacom Merger, and the creation of the United Paramount Network and The Warner Bros. Network all came later.)
- The show's syndicated episodes from prior seasons are distributed by 20th Cenutry Fox. (Networks used to be forbidden to participate in the syndication market. During that time, off-network reruns needed to be packaged by a seperate syndication company, or distributed by the production company. This rule was striken before this rule applied to Fox.)
- In most major markets, the show's syndicated reruns are puchased by the Fox Station Group. (In recent years, the laws have changed to allow there to be more such network-owned stations than before because fo a raising of the station ownership limits for a single company.)
- In many places, the syndicated reruns air during the 7:00 hour. (This would have been blocked by Prime Time Access Rule, but the rule never applied to Fox and was striken rather than modifed to include Fox as a network.)
In short... several of the steps in The Simpsons money-making machine would have been illegal in the 1970s. I'm not saying that The Simpsons wouldn't have existed under those rules, but the show would be a whole lot less profitable, and the profits would land in more hands than just the bottom line at News Corp.
Just so everybody's clear on this... a four-year contract with the actors doesn't indicate that the show has been promised four more years. TV actor contracts always are conditional on the show going on. So, what this contract means is that the production studio and the actors have agreed on the pay rate table to be used for the next four years, assuming the show goes on that long. If The Simpsons goes five more years into a 20th season, the actors and studio will need to go back to the table to talk money again.
So, as long as the show keeps going, we can be sure that there's going to be no major cast defections over the next four years.
A CEO doesn't always have to represent the views of his whole company... he's allowed to have personal political views too.
I seriously doubt Diebold as an entire operation wants to be unfair. However, it's a bit disturbing that the CEO of such an operation shows such strong political views to the public because it makes us think that he'd be more willing to cover up a discovered problem with his system than to admit to it...
I agree that the "grand conspiracy" theory that Diebold is actively trying to sweep Republicans into power is a bit much...
However, Diebold played right into those people's hands with what they did, running an uncertified product which skipped all of the checking processes that were in place to make sure that nobody is attempt to cheat the system. The first set of canaries in this mine are dead... we shouldn't allow this operation to go any further because once they go arround the certification process, there isn't really much more needed to taint the vote counts and get away with it.
Worse than just having an apparent interest in the outcome of the elections, Diebold managed to trip over the safety valves that are supposed to make sure no company can tamper with the results for any reason.
The software they ran, everywhere in the state, on election day was not the version that they submitted for certification. You just can't skip these kinds of checks and expect to be treated like your software is honest, because these reviews exist because we're just not going to take anybody's word for it.
At best, they cut a corner they weren't allowed to. But worse yet, they undermine their credibility in claiming that we can trust that they're not going to attempt to fix what is likely to be an extremely close election in November.
Nothing Diebold ran during the primary elections turned out to have its certifications in order. They got caught running an uncertified version of their software on the day it most counted.
The list of violations is just plain piling up, and in an industry where one use of uncertified software is too many to be tolerated.
The only elections that this flawed system had been used for in California were the presidential primary elections. The Republican Party had no credible challenger to Bush, so his renomination will be nothing but a formality. The Democratic Primary was contested, but the eventual nominee of John Kerry has enough support to still be nominated even if California's votes turned out to be unacceptable.
Diebold's systems haven't yet had an election of enough importance to cause much trouble yet. And it looks like they're now not going to get the chance...
A quick thought on overvoting. This is an "error" that should be available. It indicates that you don't agree with any of the canidates, and unlike an "undervote" this cannot be argued as voter error later.
Error conditions should always be avoided. If a voter truely wants to not vote in a race, they should be asked to fill in an oval that indicates such.
In some places in the world, a "None of the above" or "None of those listed" option is on the ballot in what is called a "Turkey Ballot" format. Basically, if the non-option should obtain a specfied in the rules number that indicates a critical mass, the election must be reheld, but all of those who appeared on the ballot in the first vote are disqualified because voters have declared them all turkeys. The parties are basically each being told to nominate somebody else because the voters didn't like any of the options they were presented with.
These "oversized car crusher" robots wouldn't make for very interesting battlebots competition... they are all one-trick operations... pick up car, crush car, put car in mouth like hole, activate flame-thrower display.
Clearly the "Stuff that matters" bin is a little empty tonight if this made Slashdot...
Believe it or not, quite a few people go to airshows. And these people are a prime audience for a lot of advertising. So most of the performers are in their own business, and all the Air Force/Navy does is provide them a runway for a weekend. And Robosaurus is one of those. So no, your tax dollars were not spent on this thing.
The Air Force and Navy are happy to host such events on their property, because the crowd these events tends to attract includes a lot of young males who are interested in machinery... a perfect demographic group for miliatary recruiters to advertize in front of. So for them, they consider it a fair trade.
SCO's claims are demonstratably false. SpamCop's claims are demonstratably true.
I wish those things were true. If so, then a lot of annoying lawsuits would be taken care of very quickly in both of these issues.
If somebody is capable of demonstrating that SCO's claims are false, please step forward and end the long national nightmare!
As for the opt out. It only takes one person who says they asked to be taken off and wern't....
Unfortunately, the standard is not that low.
It only takes one person who can submit proof that they complied with Richter's opt-out instructions to indicate that they wished to be taken off, and weren't.
Just saying you tried isn't enough... you have to have requested and requested correctly.
It doesn't matter if the box starts at yes, starts at no... or if there is no box at all and the terms on the form simply says that by submitting the form you're agreeing...
You have to be taking a proactive action by filling out and submitting the form. That's enough to make it opt in.
he will repeatedly declare he is an "e-mail marketer"
How is any form of "marketer" not one and the same with "scum"?
Good. Then write up an affidavit, and send it to the Spamcop folks to help them in their lawsuit. Seriously. Mentioning it on /. won't do anything.
And don't forget request that the court keep the e-mail address you mention in that affidavit under seal... otherwise it won't just be published on one website anymore.
Richter's actually using a legal principle that the anti-SCO people are also using.
When somebody goes walking around spreading FUD against you, saying that you're breaking the law and are going to get sued... you can go to court and effectively file their lawsuit against you for them. You basically sue them seeking either the FUD-spreaders shutting up, or them actually filing the lawsuit and going forward with it.
Richter's claiming SpamCop's spreading FUD against him, the same way SCO is spreading FUD agaisnt Linux users... just because the majority opinion of somebody is low here at Slashdot doesn't take away their rights in court.
Collect the facts you have, make darned sure they are all 100%, hand them to SpamCop. They use it in this suit to disprove the "they just dont remember" statement ( 1 counterexample disproves a claim... ). Be ready to testify.
Be ready to testify. When doing so, be ready to state your name, phyiscal address, and e-mail address for the public record...
So the non-Richter spammers can then pick up your e-mail address off that record... talk about a can't win situation!
That seems to be a valid contact address, but that's not their Opt-Out address.
The only place they have to publish their Opt-Out intructions is at the end of every e-mail they send. Can't tell the difference between Richter's e-mails and the other not-law-compliant spamemrs? That's your problem...
Yep, opting in is so easy you can do it without realizing you did. Opting out is so hard you have to strugle to get it done and will often fall into the trap of verifying that you read spam e-mail.
Oh, and you kill your spam before you read it? Oh well, you'll also end up killing the ever elusive opt-out info.
Somehow, this CAN-SPAM law isn't quite what we wanted in an anti-spam law...
That address STILL gets Richter's spam-crap. Just like every other spammer out there, he's a liar, a thief (ripping off the people paying him to advertise), and deserves to be gotten rid of.
Are you sure it's really Richter's spam-crap you're getting, rather than somebody else's spam-crap? You've got to be sure you're accusing the right people when you go accusing...
Isn't that a lot like suing the credit reporting companies because you went bankrupt and they put you on their "do not extend credit" list? You could call it "tortious interference" with your ability to get a credit card or a mortgage.
I think that's been tried many times and hasn't worked. Why would this?
Because the credit card company can show up in court with contracts that indicate you really did agree to pay that debt, and then you didn't. They can spread bad facts about you because they can bring supporting documents that stand behind those facts.
Unfortately... you can't exactly prove the negative that says you never did opt in to get Ricter's e-mails. In fact, if you're willing to give him your e-mail address, he'll gladly tell you when and where you agreed that he could send you e-mail about anything he wants to. And if you send him a proper unsubscribe request, he really will unsubscribe you.
One bullet-proof defense to all complaints of slander and libel is "It's true!". However, if you can't prove the truth of that statement, you're not going to get to use that defense.