Anyone who wants to time-shift their DVD collection already does it You can't time shift something you can already watch whenever you want. I think you meant format shift.
It's my understanding that TiVo HD and Series 3 have the ability to decode and record encrypted programs via CableCARD. True that you would have to use a company box for satellite, but at least there have been rumors that DirecTV will probably start offering TiVo DVRs again soon. It's still unlikely that those boxes will include support for TivoToGo by default—but people were able to load the standard TiVo software onto the old DirecTiVo, so who knows?
How else could career politicians stay in power other than to appease the masses with knee-jerk measures that strip a small piece of freedom away? Who needs the long-term big picture when there are kids dying today?
my cable provider doesn't let me pick when I want to watch it unless I remember to tell the machine to record the show (including shows I didn't know I wanted to watch) You've just described TiVo service. Between Season Passes and Wish Lists, you shouldn't need to remember to tell your TiVo to record things you want to see. Even if you find out about something you want to see, and you're not at home, you can queue it to record from the Internet. The linked page doesn't describe it, but there is even a feature called Recommendations that will automatically record shows it thinks you might like based on other shows you've recorded. That at least somewhat addresses your need to watch shows you didn't know you wanted to see...
how do you look at the valuation of facebook? While I try not to concern myself too much with the business side of things and just focus on development, I tend to agree with Murdoch that Facebook is overvalued at $15b USD. With regard to financials, they're reportedly taking in about $150m USD in annual revenue. But, as you said the data mining potential may be quite valuable.
As a developer on a very large kid-oriented site myself, I share your personal experience with the inflated metric of user accounts. However, MySpace has a very large audience by any account—certainly more than "nobody"—and that is what I was trying to illustrate.
But now I don't think ham radio clubs, computer clubs, or even astronomy clubs are popular anymore When were these ever popular? AFAIK they have always been relegated to the geek fringe.
In the last few years I have rarely been able to find products I am shopping for at less than retail prices on eBay unless they are damaged. The only reason I would even look on eBay anymore is if I was desperate to find something that was unavailable through other channels.
I don't know what US income tax rates are, and I know US goods have (~8%) sales tax applied over the sticker price The federal (and state) income tax rate varies depending on many factors. Sales tax is collected by some states, but not others. If there is no sales tax, the state will make that money through higher rates in other taxes.
This was found in the comments of TFA, so take it with a grain of salt:
They're using Microsoft's proprietary.wma container files with streams decompressed using Microsoft proprietary WMA codecs. Even if the music is free, they're still bound to a player that supports a particular version of Microsoft's proprietary DRM.
Isn't that the point? It is for anyone considering making a deal with Microsoft now or in the future, but this particular example was not available to MTV since they were the victim.
They seem to drop commitments at a whim (PlaysForSure) While I agree with you in principle, to be fair, Microsoft dropped "PlaysForSure" after the deal with MTV to create URGE had already happened. There are probably earlier examples of Microsoft stabbing their partners in the back, which could have served as warning signs to MTV ahead of time, but this is not one of them. It can only serve to inform future would-be dealings with Microsoft.
with sites offering better tracking services they could charge more per add, thus less adds per page They could reduce the number of ads per page, but that is not likely to happen. The companies I've seen will move the higher profit from each unit straight to the bottom line—and probably consider adding even more units to increase profit further.
You bring up some great points. I wish more services would provide multiple user facilities within an account. Not just for couples, but even for young adult children and the like. Along with that, they should definitely provide a way to spin off a particular user from an account into a new account. As for reasons not to do it, I can only imagine an increase in complexity of the development without providing an obvious increase in profit.
Simple; people are retarded. Many of them cannot fathom checking multiple email accounts. I'm sure having a tech-unsavvy mate is very difficult for some geeks.
Mod parent up. This is a good practice to get in the habit of. I do it without thinking now. Sanitation aside, it would be a great compromise for married couples since neither gets the advantage that way.
...it makes a lot more sense to tax these transactions. I work at a company that does virtual item sales, and many of us were disgusted about the fact that the items expire after a certain amount of time. But once someone suggested the idea that these transactions are purchasing a service, and not a commodity, both taxation and expiration make more sense. I'm sure there are those here that would disagree, and I myself don't think it's the most wonderful thing, but at least it makes a little more sense to me on those grounds.
I fail to see how you can draw this conclusion. Stringent airport security certainly helps reduce the chance of dangerous items being passed through the checkpoint, either maliciously or accidentally. The fact of the matter is that those things weren't a big priority before because nothing major ever happened. They have and will continue to mandate more draconian security measures to counter each new incident. You are failing to recognize that the problem with this is that we are not safer in a statistical sense than we ever were. Because a dedicated attacker will always be able to get around the checks in place, all that is accomplished is security theater. In some ways you could say the purveyors of terror have won, by making everyone live in fear and giving up their "convenience" as you call it. When I am having my body cavities searched as a routine procedure somewhere down this path of reasoning, I will think of you.
Bank safes are useless, since bank robbers could always rob a bank some other way. Bank security is a layered system where most of its strength is derived from limiting physical access to a select group of trusted people. By definition airport security can not operate this way.
A better analogy would be DRM. I'm sure as a slashdot faithful, you have read many articles and discussions about why DRM is ineffective as security. This is because a DRM security system must use some methods of distinguishing legitimate users from attackers, which is impossible to do 100% correctly. As one approaches 100% effectiveness in such a system, the usability of the subject they are trying to protect approaches 0%.
Software security patches are useless, since you can always find more holes. Wrong. Software patches do not cause ever increasing delays (perhaps more often to the contrary), invasions of privacy (also probably the opposite), and reductions of freedom (read functionality in this example) to their users.
Their job is to ensure transportation security, not maximize passenger convenience. You would think Schneier would realize this, given that many security holes arise from attempts to make things more convenient. Also, Bruce Schneier is not an authority on anything other than computer security, and his opinion is not significantly more important than anyone else's. Schneier is an expert on security methodology, and that applies to airports as well as computers. While it may not be his specialty, his evaluation is more informed than both of ours.
It's much harder to put significant amounts of explosives in underwear than it is to conceal them in shoes. I disagree, and your argument is purely speculation anyway. Not to mention the fact that significant amounts of explosives can be smuggled inside of the anus—although you seem to be okay with ever-increasing invasions of privacy required to help you feel safe.
You are talking about 3 different viruses here, which makes your "evidence" completely invalid. I was not suggesting that all three are related except that they are carried on soles and can be contracted through them as well. It was more of an attempt to aggregate for your benefit, since you seem to have missed such evidence in other posts.
I can easily envision viruses/fungii being continually deposited onto the highly trafficked floor, which I have shown can live on surfaces for quite some time, and then the next person picking them up and depositing them into their footwear to be cultivated while they sit on the plane for some duration.
Your link regarding HPV, "it thrives in warm, moist environments," does not suggest that it can not survive at all in any other environment—it may not thrive on an airport floor, but it does not need to in order to be a danger.
it's not really a concern. No precautions are being taken to mitigate the risk. If it is not a concern to you, then that is your decision. You do not speak for everyone—which I believe has brought us full circle.
Slashdot Mirror
It's my understanding that TiVo HD and Series 3 have the ability to decode and record encrypted programs via CableCARD. True that you would have to use a company box for satellite, but at least there have been rumors that DirecTV will probably start offering TiVo DVRs again soon. It's still unlikely that those boxes will include support for TivoToGo by default—but people were able to load the standard TiVo software onto the old DirecTiVo, so who knows?
How else could career politicians stay in power other than to appease the masses with knee-jerk measures that strip a small piece of freedom away? Who needs the long-term big picture when there are kids dying today?
As a developer on a very large kid-oriented site myself, I share your personal experience with the inflated metric of user accounts. However, MySpace has a very large audience by any account—certainly more than "nobody"—and that is what I was trying to illustrate.
Probably a good portion of them, but that is a large number by any standard.
The bot-net probes you.
Yes.
In the last few years I have rarely been able to find products I am shopping for at less than retail prices on eBay unless they are damaged. The only reason I would even look on eBay anymore is if I was desperate to find something that was unavailable through other channels.
Nope, because I prefer Winamp for that. :)
Relative poverty hurts more than absolute poverty. You should check out The Working Poor .
You bring up some great points. I wish more services would provide multiple user facilities within an account. Not just for couples, but even for young adult children and the like. Along with that, they should definitely provide a way to spin off a particular user from an account into a new account. As for reasons not to do it, I can only imagine an increase in complexity of the development without providing an obvious increase in profit.
Simple; people are retarded. Many of them cannot fathom checking multiple email accounts. I'm sure having a tech-unsavvy mate is very difficult for some geeks.
Mod parent up. This is a good practice to get in the habit of. I do it without thinking now. Sanitation aside, it would be a great compromise for married couples since neither gets the advantage that way.
...it makes a lot more sense to tax these transactions. I work at a company that does virtual item sales, and many of us were disgusted about the fact that the items expire after a certain amount of time. But once someone suggested the idea that these transactions are purchasing a service, and not a commodity, both taxation and expiration make more sense. I'm sure there are those here that would disagree, and I myself don't think it's the most wonderful thing, but at least it makes a little more sense to me on those grounds.
A better analogy would be DRM. I'm sure as a slashdot faithful, you have read many articles and discussions about why DRM is ineffective as security. This is because a DRM security system must use some methods of distinguishing legitimate users from attackers, which is impossible to do 100% correctly. As one approaches 100% effectiveness in such a system, the usability of the subject they are trying to protect approaches 0%. Software security patches are useless, since you can always find more holes. Wrong. Software patches do not cause ever increasing delays (perhaps more often to the contrary), invasions of privacy (also probably the opposite), and reductions of freedom (read functionality in this example) to their users. Their job is to ensure transportation security, not maximize passenger convenience. You would think Schneier would realize this, given that many security holes arise from attempts to make things more convenient. Also, Bruce Schneier is not an authority on anything other than computer security, and his opinion is not significantly more important than anyone else's. Schneier is an expert on security methodology, and that applies to airports as well as computers. While it may not be his specialty, his evaluation is more informed than both of ours. It's much harder to put significant amounts of explosives in underwear than it is to conceal them in shoes. I disagree, and your argument is purely speculation anyway. Not to mention the fact that significant amounts of explosives can be smuggled inside of the anus—although you seem to be okay with ever-increasing invasions of privacy required to help you feel safe. You are talking about 3 different viruses here, which makes your "evidence" completely invalid. I was not suggesting that all three are related except that they are carried on soles and can be contracted through them as well. It was more of an attempt to aggregate for your benefit, since you seem to have missed such evidence in other posts.
I can easily envision viruses/fungii being continually deposited onto the highly trafficked floor, which I have shown can live on surfaces for quite some time, and then the next person picking them up and depositing them into their footwear to be cultivated while they sit on the plane for some duration.
Your link regarding HPV, "it thrives in warm, moist environments," does not suggest that it can not survive at all in any other environment—it may not thrive on an airport floor, but it does not need to in order to be a danger. it's not really a concern. No precautions are being taken to mitigate the risk. If it is not a concern to you, then that is your decision. You do not speak for everyone—which I believe has brought us full circle.