Does that mean the the show's site has just been left stale all these years? That site seems to imply the show is still in production, despite outliving its title.
TechTV seems to think Beyond 2000 makes a suitable replacement for Tomorrow's World on their lineup. Presently, the two shows are taking turns aring in the 8:30pm ET weeknight slot on the network.
However, for some strange reason TechTV is starting with the 1997 episodes of Beyond 2000, even though the show is still in first-run production. Not yet clear what will happen when TechTV reaches the end of the 1997 episodes.
TechTV, as the present US outlet for Tomorrow's World now finds itself in a bind. Just last week they repromoted the show to run twice a week in prime time, but now they know no new episodes are on the way.
One other powerful use of VB is as a high-level controler of ActiveX objects. When factor in that all of the major Microsoft applications expose themselves for automation via ActiveX, and in fact most of them use Visial Basic for Applications as their primary macro language, Visual Basic becomes a very powerful bridge between Microsoft products.
Job openings are crammed with requirements that are not necessary. Applicant should have 5 years experience with C#.
That isn't even possible... C# didn't exist in 1998!
A lot of employers have heard that it's a "buyers market" and forgotten that their dream employee is sometimes a theoretical person who doesn't exist. Those employers who are holding out for the impossible will find themselves still short-staffed when the recovery hits, and will get lapped by a fully staffed competitor who used the slow times to train on the job.
But why would a business ever willingly turn away customers?
The reason industries self-regulate like the way the movie industry has is because there is a threat that if they don't self-regulate, they will be government regulated, and self-imposed rules are always easier to follow than ones that are forced.
There needs to be a serious threat that government regulation is coming to the video game industry in order to scare the currently ignorant retailers into the system.
I'm not saying any of those things should be banned. I'm saying that if a teenager is doing most or all of those things, it is a warning sign. It needs to be taken as a warning sign, meaning that the parent should look into whether or not there is a more serious problem.
When kids are allowed to do these things unchecked, there is a possiblity that Columbine-like killers may result. Yeah, not a certainty, but just a possiblity. However, one set of those kids is one too many.
The standard should be that the kids want the game, so that the parents have to go to the store to help them buy it. Yeah, parents spending time with their kids understanding what they're doing.
Yeah, one violent video game isn't going to cause a problem. However, if all the kid does is play FPS games, and that's all his friends do, and then those friends play paintball every weekend, and one of these friends has an obsession with real life guns.... this is a chain where the parents have to step in SOMEWHERE or else a Columbine-style situation develops. Finding out that little Johnny's mal-adjusted is something that should happen long before violence actually happens.
Movie theaters are known to at least make an effort to card children who are trying to go to a movie that according to the rating they should not be allowed to see without their parents.
Big chain stores appear to be taking the "M for Mature" rating seriously, but that just goes to say to a 16 year old that they should buy the game someplace else. There are enough software retailers who don't take the ERSB rating seriously so that it just functions as a label on the box... one that to the kids indicates "The good stuff is in this one!"
In order for the ratings to do what they're supposed to do, there has to be a solid wall that says if you're not 18, you need your parent's approval to get your hands on this game. So far, that part of the system is lacking.
They used the free iApps to get people to convert over to the Mac platform, becoming dependant on the tool and the platform, then not being able to switch back when the price goes up.
iTools went from free to $100/year... nice jump there.
They own a network, but ABC does not own very many TV stations.
Therfore, they are depending on companies such as Hearst-Argile to make the last-mile link between the network programming and the viewers. If Hearst-Argile were ever to decide to create its own network using its stations to start it, ABC would suddenly be off the air in several major cities, and in the crouded TV field would have a hard time finding replacement affiliates without taking a major downgrade.
Likewise, The Disney Channel, ESPN, and ABC Family are cable networks... but Disney doesn't have a cable system with which to make the last-mile link. If cable companies decided to walk away from Disney, those cable networks would suddenly be devalued with no way to reach end viewers.
Owning content is worthless if you have no way to sell it to somebody.
If The Company is publically traded, you can buy shares and their for profit from the fact you and everyone around you is being ripped of.
Have you noticed that most of the truely evil companies have large shareholders, but not a true majority owners? Yep, we're ripping ourselves off so we can fund our own retirement in our 401k.
Yes. You see, Disney doesn't own any cable systems, and not very many TV stations compared to others. It's absolutely dependant on others to push its content out.
If the phone and cable companies get more powerful, that's bad for Disney, therefore Fritz is against it.
One tactic in radio avertising is called "buying the market". That is the act of a single sponsor buying a commercial spot that is scheduled to be run at roughly the same time on every major statiion in the city. No matter what station you listen to, or even if you hop between stations, there's likely no way you'll not hear this sponsor's message that day.
This is a pretty rare tactic because it's both expensive and hard to do. (You have to buy time from several different companies, and some stations might not have an ad slot available where you want it.) However, if the same media company controls all of the signals that you listen to, it's very easy for a sponsor to deal with one company to push whatever message it wants out to you.
This is the reason why there has to be walls between the people who make the content, the channels that present the content, and technical provider that delivers the channels.
If the market is permitted to behave naturally, we will be down to a small handful of players who own the entire process including the studio to make the content, the cable channels that package the content, and then the communication networks with which to sell the cable channels. This seems okay on the surface, but there's a huge problem.
It's hard to start a movie studio, it's hard to start a cable network, and it's hard to start a cable system / satellite company. However, it's much more than three times as hard to have to start all three at the same time. (If any one component of the three is a failure, the whole project gets knocked off course even if the other two components are perfect.) By redefining what used to be three games into one, they have made it much harder for new enterants to get in their way.
BTW... why hasn't Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, or Peter Jennings done an in-depth report on the effects of communications industry consoldiation?
KISS-FM is the most visible format clone, but if you have a station that does local news in the morning, Rush Limbaugh around lunchtime, and Art Bell at late night, you have a cookie-cutter Clear Channel talk station.
There is no such thing as a major independent national news voice in TV or radio anymore. They're all owned by Viacom, Disney, General Electric, News Corp., and AOL/Time Warner, or they take funding from the U.S. Government.
The only places you find small news outlets still alive is local TV (because the big companies are restricted from buying stations that reach all of the population) and print newspapers (because the big companies are restricted from buying newspapers where they own local stations).
If those barriers are lifted, what do you think is gonna happen?
The US Supreme Court only answers the question before it... and the question this case is asking is about jurisdiction (so that somebody can be tried under the DMCA), not the DMCA itself.
There is no chance we're going to get "The DMCA is unconstitutional!" out of this case. The DMCA is not even going to be discussed by the Supreme Court during this visit... maybe later in this case, but not right now.
The problem is the way fair use is worded. It's not "You have a right to create a backup." It's closer to "If you do create a backup, you haven't violated the law by doing so."
The xxAA's can't ram through a law ending that backup exception, that'd smell funny and no representative would vote for it. So what they put instead into the DMCA is a restriction that makes it illegal to publish instructions on how to break any encryption when its used to protect a copyrighted work. If you can't decrypt the data in order to make your backup copy, it's impossible to make that backup copy.
People aren't fighting for the affirmative right to make a backup copy for one reason... people falsely think we already have it.
P4 was suspect from the day it was released by DirecTV, since the card was produced by the same people who released 3rd generation card that was also hacked because of leaked information.
Before the P4 card was out, plans for a 5th generation card that will be produced in house by DirecTV were already started. This alone discurages hackers, anything they discover now already has a limited life.
Slashdot Mirror
Does that mean the the show's site has just been left stale all these years? That site seems to imply the show is still in production, despite outliving its title.
TechTV seems to think Beyond 2000 makes a suitable replacement for Tomorrow's World on their lineup. Presently, the two shows are taking turns aring in the 8:30pm ET weeknight slot on the network.
However, for some strange reason TechTV is starting with the 1997 episodes of Beyond 2000, even though the show is still in first-run production. Not yet clear what will happen when TechTV reaches the end of the 1997 episodes.
The show lasted 30 years. In fact, it lasted "almost 40"... but it didn't make it 40 years, just almost.
TechTV, as the present US outlet for Tomorrow's World now finds itself in a bind. Just last week they repromoted the show to run twice a week in prime time, but now they know no new episodes are on the way.
First we need to get the ex-busdrivers out of management... C# hasn't been around for 8-10 years!
One other powerful use of VB is as a high-level controler of ActiveX objects. When factor in that all of the major Microsoft applications expose themselves for automation via ActiveX, and in fact most of them use Visial Basic for Applications as their primary macro language, Visual Basic becomes a very powerful bridge between Microsoft products.
Job openings are crammed with requirements that are not necessary. Applicant should have 5 years experience with C#.
That isn't even possible... C# didn't exist in 1998!
A lot of employers have heard that it's a "buyers market" and forgotten that their dream employee is sometimes a theoretical person who doesn't exist. Those employers who are holding out for the impossible will find themselves still short-staffed when the recovery hits, and will get lapped by a fully staffed competitor who used the slow times to train on the job.
If you have a skill that qualifies you for a job that pays $100,000 a year, but all such positions are filled, do you really have a useful skill?
"C" would have returned every time the letter is used alone, which would be far too many false positives to even bother trying.
But why would a business ever willingly turn away customers?
The reason industries self-regulate like the way the movie industry has is because there is a threat that if they don't self-regulate, they will be government regulated, and self-imposed rules are always easier to follow than ones that are forced.
There needs to be a serious threat that government regulation is coming to the video game industry in order to scare the currently ignorant retailers into the system.
I'm not saying any of those things should be banned. I'm saying that if a teenager is doing most or all of those things, it is a warning sign. It needs to be taken as a warning sign, meaning that the parent should look into whether or not there is a more serious problem.
When kids are allowed to do these things unchecked, there is a possiblity that Columbine-like killers may result. Yeah, not a certainty, but just a possiblity. However, one set of those kids is one too many.
The standard should be that the kids want the game, so that the parents have to go to the store to help them buy it. Yeah, parents spending time with their kids understanding what they're doing.
Yeah, one violent video game isn't going to cause a problem. However, if all the kid does is play FPS games, and that's all his friends do, and then those friends play paintball every weekend, and one of these friends has an obsession with real life guns.... this is a chain where the parents have to step in SOMEWHERE or else a Columbine-style situation develops. Finding out that little Johnny's mal-adjusted is something that should happen long before violence actually happens.
Movie theaters are known to at least make an effort to card children who are trying to go to a movie that according to the rating they should not be allowed to see without their parents.
Big chain stores appear to be taking the "M for Mature" rating seriously, but that just goes to say to a 16 year old that they should buy the game someplace else. There are enough software retailers who don't take the ERSB rating seriously so that it just functions as a label on the box... one that to the kids indicates "The good stuff is in this one!"
In order for the ratings to do what they're supposed to do, there has to be a solid wall that says if you're not 18, you need your parent's approval to get your hands on this game. So far, that part of the system is lacking.
This software is "free as in drugs."
They used the free iApps to get people to convert over to the Mac platform, becoming dependant on the tool and the platform, then not being able to switch back when the price goes up.
iTools went from free to $100/year... nice jump there.
True, but discount all of the NPR stations that are connected to either a PBS TV station or a college... and how many do you have left?
They own a network, but ABC does not own very many TV stations.
Therfore, they are depending on companies such as Hearst-Argile to make the last-mile link between the network programming and the viewers. If Hearst-Argile were ever to decide to create its own network using its stations to start it, ABC would suddenly be off the air in several major cities, and in the crouded TV field would have a hard time finding replacement affiliates without taking a major downgrade.
Likewise, The Disney Channel, ESPN, and ABC Family are cable networks... but Disney doesn't have a cable system with which to make the last-mile link. If cable companies decided to walk away from Disney, those cable networks would suddenly be devalued with no way to reach end viewers.
Owning content is worthless if you have no way to sell it to somebody.
If The Company is publically traded, you can buy shares and their for profit from the fact you and everyone around you is being ripped of.
Have you noticed that most of the truely evil companies have large shareholders, but not a true majority owners? Yep, we're ripping ourselves off so we can fund our own retirement in our 401k.
Yes. You see, Disney doesn't own any cable systems, and not very many TV stations compared to others. It's absolutely dependant on others to push its content out.
If the phone and cable companies get more powerful, that's bad for Disney, therefore Fritz is against it.
One tactic in radio avertising is called "buying the market". That is the act of a single sponsor buying a commercial spot that is scheduled to be run at roughly the same time on every major statiion in the city. No matter what station you listen to, or even if you hop between stations, there's likely no way you'll not hear this sponsor's message that day.
This is a pretty rare tactic because it's both expensive and hard to do. (You have to buy time from several different companies, and some stations might not have an ad slot available where you want it.) However, if the same media company controls all of the signals that you listen to, it's very easy for a sponsor to deal with one company to push whatever message it wants out to you.
This is the reason why there has to be walls between the people who make the content, the channels that present the content, and technical provider that delivers the channels.
If the market is permitted to behave naturally, we will be down to a small handful of players who own the entire process including the studio to make the content, the cable channels that package the content, and then the communication networks with which to sell the cable channels. This seems okay on the surface, but there's a huge problem.
It's hard to start a movie studio, it's hard to start a cable network, and it's hard to start a cable system / satellite company. However, it's much more than three times as hard to have to start all three at the same time. (If any one component of the three is a failure, the whole project gets knocked off course even if the other two components are perfect.) By redefining what used to be three games into one, they have made it much harder for new enterants to get in their way.
BTW... why hasn't Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, or Peter Jennings done an in-depth report on the effects of communications industry consoldiation?
KISS-FM is the most visible format clone, but if you have a station that does local news in the morning, Rush Limbaugh around lunchtime, and Art Bell at late night, you have a cookie-cutter Clear Channel talk station.
There is no such thing as a major independent national news voice in TV or radio anymore. They're all owned by Viacom, Disney, General Electric, News Corp., and AOL/Time Warner, or they take funding from the U.S. Government.
The only places you find small news outlets still alive is local TV (because the big companies are restricted from buying stations that reach all of the population) and print newspapers (because the big companies are restricted from buying newspapers where they own local stations).
If those barriers are lifted, what do you think is gonna happen?
The US Supreme Court only answers the question before it... and the question this case is asking is about jurisdiction (so that somebody can be tried under the DMCA), not the DMCA itself.
There is no chance we're going to get "The DMCA is unconstitutional!" out of this case. The DMCA is not even going to be discussed by the Supreme Court during this visit... maybe later in this case, but not right now.
The problem is the way fair use is worded. It's not "You have a right to create a backup." It's closer to "If you do create a backup, you haven't violated the law by doing so."
The xxAA's can't ram through a law ending that backup exception, that'd smell funny and no representative would vote for it. So what they put instead into the DMCA is a restriction that makes it illegal to publish instructions on how to break any encryption when its used to protect a copyrighted work. If you can't decrypt the data in order to make your backup copy, it's impossible to make that backup copy.
People aren't fighting for the affirmative right to make a backup copy for one reason... people falsely think we already have it.
One thing I can't seem to find anywhere on their site... what are the terms of their license?
The source code is there to download, but are we allowed to use it in our own sites?
P4 was suspect from the day it was released by DirecTV, since the card was produced by the same people who released 3rd generation card that was also hacked because of leaked information.
Before the P4 card was out, plans for a 5th generation card that will be produced in house by DirecTV were already started. This alone discurages hackers, anything they discover now already has a limited life.