The article makes clear that SBC is using its position as sole provider of DSL services to the Norhtern California area to prevent customers from switching telephone services to rival companies.
While this tactic might seem counter-productive, serving mainly to make SBC look bad while rival services gear up to implement their own DSL offerings, it would be helpful to take a look at SBC's situation from the company's standpoint.
SBC's third quarter earning report show the company getting absolutely hammered on the earnings front, with revenues off 14 percent, down over a billion dollars from a year ago. This drop can be attributed to competition between phone services, and more importantly, the rise of alternative communications technology. While DSL subscribers are increasing steadily, the added inflow of dollars is being more than offset by the hemmorhaging in the phone services sector.
Thus it can be seen that big phone companies relying primarily on local and long distance phone service are seeing their traditional market being eroded away, and are panicking. Look for more tricks like the DSL service hostage stunt in the near future as lumbering Old Economy companies try anything to shore up their shrinking incomes.
Hopefully, companies like SBC will soon be willing to implement the kind of out-of-the-box thinking needed to restructure their companies for the (gradually...) emerging New Economy, and will leave these kind of lame tricks in the past. Until then, there's always cable.
Sadly, this does not amount to very good news. The Metrowerks acquisition comes only eight months after Lineo was forced to recapitalize (translation: they were broke), which itself came only a month after Lineo laid off over a third of its workforce. For one of the first and best-known embedded Linux companies to go under like this does not shine a good light on the industry.
Meanwhile, a glance at Metrowerks website shows the company leaning strongly toward PDA applications, the market for which has been slumping as of late, and, as Gartner Dataquest's analysis tells it:
PDAs are entering a period in which they will be embraced by enterprises as core infrastructure, like PCs.This portends a gradual shift away from Palm and toward Microsoft. Although Palm devices remain more
prevalent in enterprises, Microsoft has been adept in providing the building blocks enterprises require.
Most companies Gartner talks with are moving with, or planning to move with, the Microsoft wave.
Note that the idea of Microsoft getting a leg up in "core infrastructure" integration means that the company also poses a threat to embedded applications for such "smart devices" as portable phones and videoconferencing technology.
Though the overall outlook may seem bleak for these companies, a winner is someone who can look a challenge and see an opportunity. As a libertarian, I am anti-monolpoly, and thus I hope Metrowerks' leadership can show the kind of vision needed to put Lineo's intellectual capital to good use in counteracting the Microsoft menace.
First off, congratulations to EA for moving strongly to the lead of a highly competitive market. Videogame fans are notoriously fickle and hard to please, and EA's success is a trubute to the company's leadership, vision, and especially the talented, hard working employees.
However, I can't help feeling more than a little ambivalent about the current state of the software market. The vast majority of software produced and purchased today is either business software or games. Educational software is a small fraction of the market, and is mostly used by institutions.
Back when I was in High School, in the mid-1990s, there was an excitement in the air about the potential of computers and the internet to expand people's minds and change society. Today, that culture is looked at as a thing of the past, and the only excitement tech issues generate is over the latest FPS or email worm.
It really appears that, especially given the huge improvements that have been made in technology that we have all seen since the mid-1990s, that the potential for the computer to help individuals educate, develop, and improve themselves is being lost by the wayside. I guess people prefer shooting railguns at each other.
This story may seem like a poignant bit of trivia about a footnote to history, but a deeper look reveals a lesson in this story for all of us.
There are photographs and exact data to prove that Orville Wright made a 12-second, 36.6-metre flight at Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina, Dec. 17, 1903 (...)
There's nothing but a handful of informally collected eyewitness accounts to confirm Pearse's first flight.
The moral of the story is: never underestimate the importance of a good marketing department.
The Wrights were not stupid. They realized the importance of what they were doing and made sure that their efforts would be documented. As the above quote demonstrates, this documentation is what led them to fame and fortune.
In today's competitive marketplace, it is not enough to be a "geek" with a dream. Different people have different kinds of expertise, and one asset any inventor or entrepeneur needs is a good marketing department, one that will see that the right information gets out to the right market segments, ensuring success for all.
Microsoft, RSA, eBay, the tech world is full of companies whose founders had the foresight to recruit and work closely with top talent from the management, financial, and marketing communitites.
So remember the lesson of "Bamboo Dick" Pearse the next time you want to curse out some "marketroid" who doesn't have the same comfort levels around technology as you. His department might be the only thing that keeps your company from joining the long, long list of good business ideas that didn't quite work out.
One common theme (aside from terrorism, of course) clearly stands out from among the NYT's long list of ideas. What do all these have in common?
Botox Parties
Featherless Chickens
Ratbots
Genetically Modified Saliva
Cooling Atheletes From The Inside Out
The answer is they are all about using technology to enhance or modify biology. There is a human impulse to go above and beyond the constraints of biological limitations. This is because the imagination will always overflow and escape the boundaries of our bones, nerves, and muscle.
This impulse to strive, excel, and improve is at the heart of what makes us human. The striving imperative motivates everything from mountain climbers to astronauts, to the market economy itself. To stifle this urge would be to stunt our very humanity.
As a libertarian I strongly support any efforts by striving, creative individuals to transcend the forces that constrain humanity. "Ratbots" may seem creepy to timid animal rights fundamentalists, but I prefer to see these kinds of experiments as an exciting beginning, as one tiny step on the part of humankind into a new world of freedom and possibility.
By now,everyone should be familiar with Richard Bartle's classic article about the four types of MORPG players. To-wit:
The four things that people typically enjoyed personally about MUDs were:
i) Achievement within the game context.
Players give themselves game-related goals, and vigorously set out to achieve them (...)
ii) Exploration of the game.
Players try to find out as much as they can about the virtual world. Although initially this means mapping its topology (ie. exploring the MUD's breadth), later it advances to experimentation with its physics (ie. exploring the MUD's depth).
iii) Socialising with others.
Players use the game's communicative facilities, and apply the role-playing that these engender, as a context in which to converse (and otherwise interact) with their fellow players.
iv) Imposition upon others.
Players use the tools provided by the game to cause distress to (or, in rare circumstances, to help) other players. (...)
Note that Holocron's writeup assumes out of hand that Star Wars: Galaxies players are only concerned with developing their characters, that is, that the only legitimate way to play the game is within the "Achievement" context. This is viewing the potential market for this game through far too narrow a field.
There are any number of legitimate reasons why MMORPG players who prefer the three types other than "Achievemer" would run multiple characters. "Explorers" would want to try many different classes or races. "Socializers" would want a different character to suit different moods or hang out with different crowds. "Imposers" (player-killer types) would need plenty of backups....
Furthermore, Holocron's post made no mention of whether any reasonable pricing scheme other than forcing users to start entire new accounts (doubtless containing much redundant information) was even considered.
The statement that multiple accounts are used primarily for muling belies an overly constrained mindset about how and why people play MMORPGs. I can only conclude that cutting out three fourths of SW:G's potential market with this draconian pricing move will only have a negative impact on profits.
Where are the $*#&@!!! real financials?
on
Mandrake News
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
What kind of stunt is Mandrakesoft trying to pull? Having a little timeline chart showing "revenue" and "expenses" by themselves tells us nothing. This is an imortant point, so I shall be a snot and repeat it: MandrakeSoft's little chart tells us nothing.
There are any number of ways for a company's reported revenues to increase, ranging from a genuine increase in sales to more underhanded methods like (for example) reporting certain types of expected future income as present revenues. Likewise, there are any number of ways to show a decrease in expenses on the balance sheet, ranging from honest-to-goodness cost cuts, to sneaky Enron moves like hiding expenses through the use of stock options as executive pay, or dummy subsidiaries.
Don't get me wrong, I am not accusing MandrakeSoft of any wrongdoing, what I am saying is unless we get to see detailed financials, and I mean income and cash flow statements, a balance sheet, and footnotes, MandrakeSoft's rosy financial report is just another press release.
MandrakeSoft's stock price is still off around $1.25 from its high for the year, if they want to get their price up, it would help to get better information to investors.
Sarcasm aside, it has to be said that there are better uses for a television, especially the home-theater setups many Tivo users prefer, than as a slideshow screen or jukebox.
I refer of course to using the television as a medium for viewing video clips saved in formats such as wmv, mpeg, divx, avi, etc. If users could transfer porn^H^H^H^H educational videos and the like directly to the Tivo box from their computers, it would be a great increase in convenience, and might just be the app that secures in the customer bade Tivo needs.
This article brings up an interesting issue regarding Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, and human/nonhuman rights.
Namely, what happens if some researched finally stumbles across an application that passes the Turing test? One that for all intents and purposes appears to be a conscious life form?
The resulting ethical problems will be myriad:
Will the AI life form be the property of the person or corporation that developed it?
Will the AI life form be copyrightable?
Will the creator of the AI life form be obligated to keep it "alive" (i.e. keep the power running, etc.) as long as possible?
Will the AI life form have the same rights as an ordinary human being?
Will distributing the souce code for the AI life form be regulated under anti-cloning statutes?
Will the AI life form be allowed to earn money as a result of its efforts in controlling entities in videogames?
Will the AI life form be entitled to royalties as a participant in the creator of the videogame?
As a libertarian I am torn between my concerns about keeping markets free and unregulated, and my concerns for the freedoms and rights of potential AI life forms. Interesting times...
For those of you wondering what the "enemy's" take on all this is, the MPAA's site has their description of Broadcast Flag here. My favorite part:
"It is unfortunate that some people may attempt to illegally hack or break into this security system. However, even if a few are successful, the flag will not be worthless. Most people are honest and will not attempt to circumvent the flag. We are hopeful that the broadcast flag will enable content providers to release more of their programming in HDTV format and drive the market forward providing new options for consumers. Consumers should not lose out just because there is threat against the technology"
As if Broadcast Flag existed to benefit consumers instead of purely protecting the interests of media corporations.
The problem faced by the EFF and like organizations will be convincing the public that they are not a bunch of.mp3-trading IP thieves. They are up against the deep, deep pockets of the entertainment industry, and faced with a credulous public which, as a rule, follows blindly along with the flashiest commercials (or most effective marketing campaign, as we were taught in b-school). I sincerely hope the EFF will be able to put a responsible face on digital copying and fair use issues, and will not end up looking like amoral war3z kidd33z
The strategic issues with this situation are intriguing. Microsoft Office presently faces competition from several fronts, the biggest two threats to its dominance of the market at present being Sun's StarOffice suite, and Corel's Wordperfect. Also nibbling away at MS Office's market share are smaller Opne-Source rivals like Open Office, KOffice, etc.
Any one of these may not pose any threat on their own, but together they may be in a position to eat away a sizeable chunk of Microsoft's profits. The obvious way for Microsoft combat to combat this multiheaded threat is a two-pronged attack..
First, Microsoft needs to emphasize the imporance of the network effect (which is basically when a product becomes more useful and valuable as its userbase grows: this effect can be observed in a product like an office suite, where I need my document to be readable on my client's system. It is considerably less pronounced in something like toothpaste ) in its marketing efforts. The pitch would go like this: most everyone is familiar with MS Office, most everyone uses MS Office now, so it's best to stick with MS Office. StarOffice may boast "95%" compatibility, but what business wants to risk their bottom line on the chance that they'll never have to worry about the other 5%?
The second prong to combat the hordes of rival office suites would be for Microsoft to simply slash the price of MS Office. Miscrosoft already pulls in nearly 80% profit on Office, and is in an excellent cash position, having over a billion in liquid reserves. They could therefore easily handle a temporary dent in profits for the sake of maintaining or even expanding market share. This would have the additional advantage of reinforcing the network effects enjoyed by MS Office, thereby strengthening Microsoft's position. Prices could be raised again, of course, with the next release of MS Office.
Or maybe not. Perhaps Ballmer and co. have something even sneakier up their sleeves, or maybe we will see Microsoft's rivals make inroads into the Office suite market. Whatever the case, it's fun to watch the plays unfold, kind of like the world's slowest RTS game.
Any eGovernment initiative will mean big challenges. In many ways, the coming together of Open Source companies and government agencies is a collision of opposites.
To cite just one example by way of illustration, one of the biggest obstacles to implementing any kind of change is the mindset of the typical government employee. You thus have the freedom-loving, ever-adaptable, information-exchanging Open Source companies on one side, and the time-serving, by-the-book, unionized government workers on the other, most (not all of course) of whom resist any change to their routinized existences with every means at their disposal, from complaints, to threats of striking, and even downright insubordination.
These Open Source companies have their work very much cut out for them, and I wish them luck, but I would like to also emphasize the importance of supporting libertarian political candidates during elections (not necessarily from the Libertarain party, I can think of many worthy Republicans and a few good Dems as well). Once elected, these candidates would be in a position to effectively change the system from within by enacting real reforms and passing legislation. It is high time that the Open Source community implemented the PACs, lobbying efforts, fundraisers, and advertising campaigns that are the traditional, and I might add effective, methods of effecting change in government.
Do we really need more attorneys interfering with the commercial development of the net like this? Yes, Bonzi ads are annoying, the wording of this class action complaint distorts the truth almost as much as those silly "Your Computer is Broadcasting an IP Address!" popups. Clicking on a Bonzi ad is a waste of time, but calling it "hijacking" (a rhetorically charged term in this post-9/11 age, BTW) is a bit much.
Sure, advertisers try sneaky new things, but it's a darwinian process: for every ad, there's a counter: popup-blocking, ad-server blocking, and so forth. The problem is being handled in the marketplace. Sending Lawyers with dollar signs in their eyes into the mix is not a prescription for a more efficient internet.
Who should control the rains? Given the evident costs of developing and implementing this plan, it would appear that this project should be one of those huge government-funded public boons, like a hydropower dam or a freeway.
But hold on, do we really want the weather to be run in a manner similar to such public services as the US Post Office or (shudder) the British Dental Service? I can see it now: some impoverished nation will be saddled with a National Department of Rain, complete with overpaid, slovenly employees and mounds of red tape, which will manage to get the rainclouds set up two days after the crops have all died, or right in the middle of a soccer game.
It is hoped that a private interest who might benefit from this technology, say a responsible, efficient agricultural conglomerate like Archer-Daniels-Midland, will be able to fund and deploy these rain-making devices, ensuring that plenty of water is available for all on an efficient market-driven basis. This would be a prime example of the kind of benefits globalization can bring to both the developed and developing countries of the planet.
As a libertarian, I am concerned by the tension between wanting to stamp out the flow of spam, and the two-pronged threat anti-spam forces pose both to free speech and to email anonymity.
The ability to send unsolicited email to practically anyone has long been a valuable online tool for everything from online protests (like filling your Congressman's mailbox with anti-DMCA flames) to communicating with intriguing personalities. A good deal of anti-spam legislation can be interpreted in ways that infringe on this basic cyber-right. Worse, the anti-spam cause could also be used by authoritarian interests to crack down on all unsiolicited emails.
Likewise, anonymous remailers and open relays have been used by people to protect their privacy almost as long as email has existed. These valuable tools of freedom can also be targeted by the Ashcrofts of the world in their bid to tie back our liberites, all in the name of crushing "spam".
Let us hope that privacy-loving interests will continue to develop technological solutions to the problem of spam, thereby keeping the solution to the problem market- and freedom- based rather than relying on the "good graces" of the State to keep junk mail out of our inboxes
Here we have Elton Musk, boy genius, whose company, PayPal, in spite of the fact that its business model consisited essentially of investing its customers' deposits and pocketing the returns while performing currency exchanges (think: how high could the overhead possibly be on such a service? And variable costs are essentially zero!) while at the same time collecting fees off Business and Premier PayPal accounts, still took four years to acheive profitability.
Mr. Musk is now going to enter into the commercial sattelite launch industry, an industry whose barriers to entry are (ahem) astronimical, and compete with far cheaper Russian services. Since Mr. Musk is not utilizing any new technological innovation, he will presumably rely purely on his business know-how to make his sattelite company as efficient as PayPal...
Oh, the things a measly 1.5 billion and dollars will do to a man's ego...
H.P. Lovecraft needs to be mentioned in any discussion of any beloved Science Fiction universes. Lovecraft's work exists right at the borderline where our scientific/rational knowledge leaves off, and the cold unknown, and what just might lurk therein, encroaches.
Lovecraft's genius was to tap into the human anxiety about what might exist beyond the limits of reason and the safe, predictable, knowable world,and the nagging thought that perhaps the universe itself might harbor malevolent intent toward our fragile planet and the humans who dwell on it (Lovecraft's characters would often go insane when faced with these alien horrors)..
These fears have manifested themselves throughout history in everything from witch trials to UFO scares. Lovecraft was so good at playing off this ancient unease, in the process creating his own universe of alien gods and beings, that his legacy lives on decades after his stories (never out of print) were first published, in the form of countless "Cthulhu Mythos" stories, games, and of course tribute websites.
My theory is that Microsoft has been gradually conditioning people to accept the fact that the initial release of one of their products (Windows 1.0, WIndows 95, etc.) will always be buggy and problem-riddled. That way, whenever a new Microsoft product turns out to be be buggy and problem-riddled, people just shrug it off rather than letting the event damage their image of the company: "Oh, that's just the way Microsoft is with a new product, I'll just wait for the next release".
And the method to this madness? Simple: through this process, Microsoft has figured out a way not just to outsource a sizeable part of their product testing, but has convinced people to pay them for the privelege! Brilliant cost cutting strategy, if you think about it. No wonder the company is so profitable.
Better go soon if you're interested
on
Review: Solaris
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Boxofficeguru.com has this to say about Solaris (scroll down a bit):
Crashing into seventh place was the George Clooney/Steven Soderbergh collaboration Solaris which picked up an estimated $6.8M this weekend for a poor per screen average of $2,818. Critics reviews were mixed with most saying Clooney's performance was the highlight of the film, but moviegoers universally panned the film as CinemaScore.com reports that viewers across the board gave the movie an F. Apparently film fans were hoping for something different than what the mega-star and Oscar winning director had to offer.
Bad reviews plus bored viewers plus empty seats equals a movie that won't be in theaters long, so if you're interested in checking Solaris out, you'd better go soon.
Addmittedly, I haven't seen the film yet, but it looks suspiciously like another Soderbergh-Clooney "wouldn't-it-be-cool-to-remake" vanity project like Ocean's Eleven. Soderbergh's been coasting on the goodwill from Erin Brokovich and Traffic long enough. Unless he wants to turn into Brian DePalma, he'd better start cranking out hits again, IMHO.
Despite the reassurances, some hunters say they will stop hunting if chronic wasting disease is found in their area. "If it comes down here, I think everybody'd quit hunting," said one hunter who brought his freshly killed deer to a check station near Tremont, Ill., on opening day. "I mean, who wants to die over a deer?"
Who knows, if this disease spreads slowly enough, and reaches a point of equilibrium, it may very well turn out to be to the deer's a benefit.
As any financial advisor can tell you, humans are by nature a risk-averse species. As the above quote illustrates, fears of brain-eating prions in deer could mean the end of the deer-hunting industry, freeing the deer from the scourge of rifle-toting primates at the price of a handful of scrappie deaths each year.
Could it be that natural selection has finally discovered a way to human-proof a nonhuman species?
No Promotion?
on
Equilibrium
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have a feeling the reason for this film's lack of promotion is that there is a sense the central theme is played out. Totalitarianism just doesn't sell.
Considering how long ago and under what circumstances the classics of totalitarain sci-fi (1984, Brave new World, Animal Farm) were written, it can be seen that fears of the all-powerful state are in fact a product of the Fascist (1930s-1940s)and Cold War (1946-1992) eras.
With the fall of communism, fears of totalitarian states have eased, and at present, the most immediate threat in people's minds is of course terrorism. As President Bush's "National Security Strategy Of the United States" puts it: "(our biggest threat) is less from conquering states than from failing ones". Evidence that Americans, and hence the movie-going public, agrees with this assessment can be seen in the widespread acceptance of the PATRIOT act's intrusive extension of law-enforcement's powers. It seems Americans want more government, not less.
My point, however, is not a political one. Whatever one might think of present attitudes toward government, the fact remains that marketing is an objective science, and marketers need to react to present attitudes as they exist. Therefore, given today's pro-government climate of public opinion, it was a rational decision not to spend too much money promoting a movie that is at odds with present attitiudes.
In exactly one location - the warp nacelle supports - I was bound to break some sort of unwritten moral code: I painted them gray from their original white, and glued them to their supports.... and well, the nacelles were far too heavy to hold onto the ship's body by themselves. A liberal application of ABS plastic cement helped nicely
Really, now, does this model truly qualify as an authentic Lego creation? Sure, his deviations seem minor, but it's a slippery slope friends.
Where does it end. Is it acceptable to glue Lego bricks alongside one another to achieve the desired effect? Is it acceptable to airbrush cool color schemes on a model when the colored brick motif just isn't cutting it? What about incorporating non-lego pieces like balsa wood or erector set parts?
I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, this should be categorized more as just another plastic model kit of the Enterprise than a true Lego creation. Better luck next time.
The technical decision
to cut off perfectly working hardware is pure idiocy,
Not so, not so, not so. ATI has a reason for ensuring that their drivers function properly only with authorized hardware. ATI's marketing strategy centers around the company being recognized for making the top-quality graphics cards on the market. This definition includes all components from circuit boards to microchips. ATI's primary market is those consumers who need or want top-of-the-line video cards for personal or professional reasons. The ATI brand's image of exclusivity and quality plays a viutal role in the company's marketing strategy.
Having taken this into account, consider the Linux user community's reputation for using "hacked" or "modded" hardware for all sorts of reasons from saving money to illegally circumventing copyright restrictions. It follows that it is totally in ATI's interest to release drivers that work with their hardware exculsively. To do otherwise would be to associate the ATI brand with all matter of hacked, downscale, and jerry-rigged hardware, a move which would ultimately prove a detriment to ATI's profits.
Its really quite simple: it's a question of finding and developing a market. If you can do this, you're sold. If not, you're welcome to find a spot on the giant heap of failed products to toss your burnt-out husk of a show.
A Sci-Fi televison show is one of the trickiest of products to sell because the consumer base is much too fragmented. You have your "hard sci-fi" fans, your sci-fantasy/space opera buffs, your military SF fans, your fans who always want a "Politically Correct" message, etc.
With such multipolar market psychographics, the tendency is to try to be safe and give the show "something for everyone". Of course, the result is invariably a fragmented mess of a show, and the viewers stay away in droves: thus Firefly. Occasionally, a television show will be able to pull off the trick of satisfying most if not all of the sci-fi consumer market, Star Trek: TNG being the classic example, but such instances are far and few between.
A simpler strategy is to go for a single segment of the target market, and hope that a cult following develops, one which may even blossom into a mass following. These types of show are usually seen in syndication or on smaller networks. Successful examples of this type of show include Buffy The Vampire Slayer (target market: Goths) and Xena, Warrior Princess (target market: Lesbians).
In retrospect, it is obvious that Firefly was much too ambitious a show. The producers of the show took a big chance, and they failed big-time. It didn't help matters that the show was badly written - they couldn't even get the title right: how many sci-fi fans are going to get excited about watching a show called "Firefly"? - and shown in an unfriendly time slot. Television programmers developing future sci-fi shows would do well to pay better attention to the people who watch them.
Though the company remains profitable, Aapple's recent performance in the market has been marked by a decline in sales, in comparison to both the previous quarter, and the previous year. Per-share revenues have dropped by almost half compared with 3rd quarter 2001, down to $0.09 per share from $0.17
And now GNU/Darwin developers are marketing their products directly, for use with the considerably less expensive x86 hardware. An attempt to hedge their bets in the face of a sluggish tech market and Apple's precieved weakness? Interesting times....
Slashdot Mirror
While this tactic might seem counter-productive, serving mainly to make SBC look bad while rival services gear up to implement their own DSL offerings, it would be helpful to take a look at SBC's situation from the company's standpoint.
SBC's third quarter earning report show the company getting absolutely hammered on the earnings front, with revenues off 14 percent, down over a billion dollars from a year ago. This drop can be attributed to competition between phone services, and more importantly, the rise of alternative communications technology. While DSL subscribers are increasing steadily, the added inflow of dollars is being more than offset by the hemmorhaging in the phone services sector.
Thus it can be seen that big phone companies relying primarily on local and long distance phone service are seeing their traditional market being eroded away, and are panicking. Look for more tricks like the DSL service hostage stunt in the near future as lumbering Old Economy companies try anything to shore up their shrinking incomes.
Hopefully, companies like SBC will soon be willing to implement the kind of out-of-the-box thinking needed to restructure their companies for the (gradually...) emerging New Economy, and will leave these kind of lame tricks in the past. Until then, there's always cable.
Meanwhile, a glance at Metrowerks website shows the company leaning strongly toward PDA applications, the market for which has been slumping as of late, and, as Gartner Dataquest's analysis tells it:
Note that the idea of Microsoft getting a leg up in "core infrastructure" integration means that the company also poses a threat to embedded applications for such "smart devices" as portable phones and videoconferencing technology.Though the overall outlook may seem bleak for these companies, a winner is someone who can look a challenge and see an opportunity. As a libertarian, I am anti-monolpoly, and thus I hope Metrowerks' leadership can show the kind of vision needed to put Lineo's intellectual capital to good use in counteracting the Microsoft menace.
However, I can't help feeling more than a little ambivalent about the current state of the software market. The vast majority of software produced and purchased today is either business software or games. Educational software is a small fraction of the market, and is mostly used by institutions.
Back when I was in High School, in the mid-1990s, there was an excitement in the air about the potential of computers and the internet to expand people's minds and change society. Today, that culture is looked at as a thing of the past, and the only excitement tech issues generate is over the latest FPS or email worm.
It really appears that, especially given the huge improvements that have been made in technology that we have all seen since the mid-1990s, that the potential for the computer to help individuals educate, develop, and improve themselves is being lost by the wayside. I guess people prefer shooting railguns at each other.
The Wrights were not stupid. They realized the importance of what they were doing and made sure that their efforts would be documented. As the above quote demonstrates, this documentation is what led them to fame and fortune.
In today's competitive marketplace, it is not enough to be a "geek" with a dream. Different people have different kinds of expertise, and one asset any inventor or entrepeneur needs is a good marketing department, one that will see that the right information gets out to the right market segments, ensuring success for all.
Microsoft, RSA, eBay, the tech world is full of companies whose founders had the foresight to recruit and work closely with top talent from the management, financial, and marketing communitites.
So remember the lesson of "Bamboo Dick" Pearse the next time you want to curse out some "marketroid" who doesn't have the same comfort levels around technology as you. His department might be the only thing that keeps your company from joining the long, long list of good business ideas that didn't quite work out.
- Botox Parties
- Featherless Chickens
- Ratbots
- Genetically Modified Saliva
- Cooling Atheletes From The Inside Out
The answer is they are all about using technology to enhance or modify biology. There is a human impulse to go above and beyond the constraints of biological limitations. This is because the imagination will always overflow and escape the boundaries of our bones, nerves, and muscle.This impulse to strive, excel, and improve is at the heart of what makes us human. The striving imperative motivates everything from mountain climbers to astronauts, to the market economy itself. To stifle this urge would be to stunt our very humanity.
As a libertarian I strongly support any efforts by striving, creative individuals to transcend the forces that constrain humanity. "Ratbots" may seem creepy to timid animal rights fundamentalists, but I prefer to see these kinds of experiments as an exciting beginning, as one tiny step on the part of humankind into a new world of freedom and possibility.
There are any number of legitimate reasons why MMORPG players who prefer the three types other than "Achievemer" would run multiple characters. "Explorers" would want to try many different classes or races. "Socializers" would want a different character to suit different moods or hang out with different crowds. "Imposers" (player-killer types) would need plenty of backups....
Furthermore, Holocron's post made no mention of whether any reasonable pricing scheme other than forcing users to start entire new accounts (doubtless containing much redundant information) was even considered.
The statement that multiple accounts are used primarily for muling belies an overly constrained mindset about how and why people play MMORPGs. I can only conclude that cutting out three fourths of SW:G's potential market with this draconian pricing move will only have a negative impact on profits.
There are any number of ways for a company's reported revenues to increase, ranging from a genuine increase in sales to more underhanded methods like (for example) reporting certain types of expected future income as present revenues. Likewise, there are any number of ways to show a decrease in expenses on the balance sheet, ranging from honest-to-goodness cost cuts, to sneaky Enron moves like hiding expenses through the use of stock options as executive pay, or dummy subsidiaries.
Don't get me wrong, I am not accusing MandrakeSoft of any wrongdoing, what I am saying is unless we get to see detailed financials, and I mean income and cash flow statements, a balance sheet, and footnotes, MandrakeSoft's rosy financial report is just another press release.
MandrakeSoft's stock price is still off around $1.25 from its high for the year, if they want to get their price up, it would help to get better information to investors.
I refer of course to using the television as a medium for viewing video clips saved in formats such as wmv, mpeg, divx, avi, etc. If users could transfer porn^H^H^H^H educational videos and the like directly to the Tivo box from their computers, it would be a great increase in convenience, and might just be the app that secures in the customer bade Tivo needs.
Namely, what happens if some researched finally stumbles across an application that passes the Turing test? One that for all intents and purposes appears to be a conscious life form?
The resulting ethical problems will be myriad:
- Will the AI life form be the property of the person or corporation that developed it?
- Will the AI life form be copyrightable?
- Will the creator of the AI life form be obligated to keep it "alive" (i.e. keep the power running, etc.) as long as possible?
- Will the AI life form have the same rights as an ordinary human being?
- Will distributing the souce code for the AI life form be regulated under anti-cloning statutes?
- Will the AI life form be allowed to earn money as a result of its efforts in controlling entities in videogames?
- Will the AI life form be entitled to royalties as a participant in the creator of the videogame?
As a libertarian I am torn between my concerns about keeping markets free and unregulated, and my concerns for the freedoms and rights of potential AI life forms. Interesting times...The problem faced by the EFF and like organizations will be convincing the public that they are not a bunch of .mp3-trading IP thieves. They are up against the deep, deep pockets of the entertainment industry, and faced with a credulous public which, as a rule, follows blindly along with the flashiest commercials (or most effective marketing campaign, as we were taught in b-school). I sincerely hope the EFF will be able to put a responsible face on digital copying and fair use issues, and will not end up looking like amoral war3z kidd33z
Any one of these may not pose any threat on their own, but together they may be in a position to eat away a sizeable chunk of Microsoft's profits. The obvious way for Microsoft combat to combat this multiheaded threat is a two-pronged attack. .
First, Microsoft needs to emphasize the imporance of the network effect (which is basically when a product becomes more useful and valuable as its userbase grows: this effect can be observed in a product like an office suite, where I need my document to be readable on my client's system. It is considerably less pronounced in something like toothpaste ) in its marketing efforts. The pitch would go like this: most everyone is familiar with MS Office, most everyone uses MS Office now, so it's best to stick with MS Office. StarOffice may boast "95%" compatibility, but what business wants to risk their bottom line on the chance that they'll never have to worry about the other 5%?
The second prong to combat the hordes of rival office suites would be for Microsoft to simply slash the price of MS Office. Miscrosoft already pulls in nearly 80% profit on Office, and is in an excellent cash position, having over a billion in liquid reserves. They could therefore easily handle a temporary dent in profits for the sake of maintaining or even expanding market share. This would have the additional advantage of reinforcing the network effects enjoyed by MS Office, thereby strengthening Microsoft's position. Prices could be raised again, of course, with the next release of MS Office.
Or maybe not. Perhaps Ballmer and co. have something even sneakier up their sleeves, or maybe we will see Microsoft's rivals make inroads into the Office suite market. Whatever the case, it's fun to watch the plays unfold, kind of like the world's slowest RTS game.
To cite just one example by way of illustration, one of the biggest obstacles to implementing any kind of change is the mindset of the typical government employee. You thus have the freedom-loving, ever-adaptable, information-exchanging Open Source companies on one side, and the time-serving, by-the-book, unionized government workers on the other, most (not all of course) of whom resist any change to their routinized existences with every means at their disposal, from complaints, to threats of striking, and even downright insubordination.
These Open Source companies have their work very much cut out for them, and I wish them luck, but I would like to also emphasize the importance of supporting libertarian political candidates during elections (not necessarily from the Libertarain party, I can think of many worthy Republicans and a few good Dems as well). Once elected, these candidates would be in a position to effectively change the system from within by enacting real reforms and passing legislation. It is high time that the Open Source community implemented the PACs, lobbying efforts, fundraisers, and advertising campaigns that are the traditional, and I might add effective, methods of effecting change in government.
Sure, advertisers try sneaky new things, but it's a darwinian process: for every ad, there's a counter: popup-blocking, ad-server blocking, and so forth. The problem is being handled in the marketplace. Sending Lawyers with dollar signs in their eyes into the mix is not a prescription for a more efficient internet.
But hold on, do we really want the weather to be run in a manner similar to such public services as the US Post Office or (shudder) the British Dental Service? I can see it now: some impoverished nation will be saddled with a National Department of Rain, complete with overpaid, slovenly employees and mounds of red tape, which will manage to get the rainclouds set up two days after the crops have all died, or right in the middle of a soccer game.
It is hoped that a private interest who might benefit from this technology, say a responsible, efficient agricultural conglomerate like Archer-Daniels-Midland, will be able to fund and deploy these rain-making devices, ensuring that plenty of water is available for all on an efficient market-driven basis. This would be a prime example of the kind of benefits globalization can bring to both the developed and developing countries of the planet.
The ability to send unsolicited email to practically anyone has long been a valuable online tool for everything from online protests (like filling your Congressman's mailbox with anti-DMCA flames) to communicating with intriguing personalities. A good deal of anti-spam legislation can be interpreted in ways that infringe on this basic cyber-right. Worse, the anti-spam cause could also be used by authoritarian interests to crack down on all unsiolicited emails.
Likewise, anonymous remailers and open relays have been used by people to protect their privacy almost as long as email has existed. These valuable tools of freedom can also be targeted by the Ashcrofts of the world in their bid to tie back our liberites, all in the name of crushing "spam".
Let us hope that privacy-loving interests will continue to develop technological solutions to the problem of spam, thereby keeping the solution to the problem market- and freedom- based rather than relying on the "good graces" of the State to keep junk mail out of our inboxes
Mr. Musk is now going to enter into the commercial sattelite launch industry, an industry whose barriers to entry are (ahem) astronimical, and compete with far cheaper Russian services. Since Mr. Musk is not utilizing any new technological innovation, he will presumably rely purely on his business know-how to make his sattelite company as efficient as PayPal...
Oh, the things a measly 1.5 billion and dollars will do to a man's ego...
Lovecraft's genius was to tap into the human anxiety about what might exist beyond the limits of reason and the safe, predictable, knowable world ,and the nagging thought that perhaps the universe itself might harbor malevolent intent toward our fragile planet and the humans who dwell on it (Lovecraft's characters would often go insane when faced with these alien horrors). .
These fears have manifested themselves throughout history in everything from witch trials to UFO scares. Lovecraft was so good at playing off this ancient unease, in the process creating his own universe of alien gods and beings, that his legacy lives on decades after his stories (never out of print) were first published, in the form of countless "Cthulhu Mythos" stories, games, and of course tribute websites.
And the method to this madness? Simple: through this process, Microsoft has figured out a way not just to outsource a sizeable part of their product testing, but has convinced people to pay them for the privelege! Brilliant cost cutting strategy, if you think about it. No wonder the company is so profitable.
Addmittedly, I haven't seen the film yet, but it looks suspiciously like another Soderbergh-Clooney "wouldn't-it-be-cool-to-remake" vanity project like Ocean's Eleven. Soderbergh's been coasting on the goodwill from Erin Brokovich and Traffic long enough. Unless he wants to turn into Brian DePalma, he'd better start cranking out hits again, IMHO.
Who knows, if this disease spreads slowly enough, and reaches a point of equilibrium, it may very well turn out to be to the deer's a benefit.
As any financial advisor can tell you, humans are by nature a risk-averse species. As the above quote illustrates, fears of brain-eating prions in deer could mean the end of the deer-hunting industry, freeing the deer from the scourge of rifle-toting primates at the price of a handful of scrappie deaths each year.
Could it be that natural selection has finally discovered a way to human-proof a nonhuman species?
Considering how long ago and under what circumstances the classics of totalitarain sci-fi (1984, Brave new World, Animal Farm) were written, it can be seen that fears of the all-powerful state are in fact a product of the Fascist (1930s-1940s)and Cold War (1946-1992) eras.
With the fall of communism, fears of totalitarian states have eased, and at present, the most immediate threat in people's minds is of course terrorism. As President Bush's "National Security Strategy Of the United States" puts it: "(our biggest threat) is less from conquering states than from failing ones". Evidence that Americans, and hence the movie-going public, agrees with this assessment can be seen in the widespread acceptance of the PATRIOT act's intrusive extension of law-enforcement's powers. It seems Americans want more government, not less.
My point, however, is not a political one. Whatever one might think of present attitudes toward government, the fact remains that marketing is an objective science, and marketers need to react to present attitudes as they exist. Therefore, given today's pro-government climate of public opinion, it was a rational decision not to spend too much money promoting a movie that is at odds with present attitiudes.
Really, now, does this model truly qualify as an authentic Lego creation? Sure, his deviations seem minor, but it's a slippery slope friends.
Where does it end. Is it acceptable to glue Lego bricks alongside one another to achieve the desired effect? Is it acceptable to airbrush cool color schemes on a model when the colored brick motif just isn't cutting it? What about incorporating non-lego pieces like balsa wood or erector set parts?
I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, this should be categorized more as just another plastic model kit of the Enterprise than a true Lego creation. Better luck next time.
Not so, not so, not so. ATI has a reason for ensuring that their drivers function properly only with authorized hardware. ATI's marketing strategy centers around the company being recognized for making the top-quality graphics cards on the market. This definition includes all components from circuit boards to microchips. ATI's primary market is those consumers who need or want top-of-the-line video cards for personal or professional reasons. The ATI brand's image of exclusivity and quality plays a viutal role in the company's marketing strategy.
Having taken this into account, consider the Linux user community's reputation for using "hacked" or "modded" hardware for all sorts of reasons from saving money to illegally circumventing copyright restrictions. It follows that it is totally in ATI's interest to release drivers that work with their hardware exculsively. To do otherwise would be to associate the ATI brand with all matter of hacked, downscale, and jerry-rigged hardware, a move which would ultimately prove a detriment to ATI's profits.
A Sci-Fi televison show is one of the trickiest of products to sell because the consumer base is much too fragmented. You have your "hard sci-fi" fans, your sci-fantasy/space opera buffs, your military SF fans, your fans who always want a "Politically Correct" message, etc.
With such multipolar market psychographics, the tendency is to try to be safe and give the show "something for everyone". Of course, the result is invariably a fragmented mess of a show, and the viewers stay away in droves: thus Firefly. Occasionally, a television show will be able to pull off the trick of satisfying most if not all of the sci-fi consumer market, Star Trek: TNG being the classic example, but such instances are far and few between.
A simpler strategy is to go for a single segment of the target market, and hope that a cult following develops, one which may even blossom into a mass following. These types of show are usually seen in syndication or on smaller networks. Successful examples of this type of show include Buffy The Vampire Slayer (target market: Goths) and Xena, Warrior Princess (target market: Lesbians).
In retrospect, it is obvious that Firefly was much too ambitious a show. The producers of the show took a big chance, and they failed big-time. It didn't help matters that the show was badly written - they couldn't even get the title right: how many sci-fi fans are going to get excited about watching a show called "Firefly"? - and shown in an unfriendly time slot. Television programmers developing future sci-fi shows would do well to pay better attention to the people who watch them.
And now GNU/Darwin developers are marketing their products directly, for use with the considerably less expensive x86 hardware. An attempt to hedge their bets in the face of a sluggish tech market and Apple's precieved weakness? Interesting times....