Re:Howto - Legalized Price Fixing
on
DRAM Price Fixing
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I meant "company", not country. And I wasn't speaking literally but since all OPEC members agree to the same production and price levels, OPEC can be viewed as a single company.
Re:Howto - Legalized Price Fixing
on
DRAM Price Fixing
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
What you cite is not price-fixing without some added components, and with those added components, your little example is illegal. For prices to be fixed, companies need to all be in agreement that their prices should all stay at level X so that everyone is making a tidy profit. In the situations you outline, you don't specify whether ATT and MCI have communicated and agreed to these price increases. If one company is merely changing their pricing policy and another realizes that they can remain competitive in the market with higher prices now that the other company has raised their prices, this is merely the flow of capitalism.
Now, getting to your comment that price fixing laws are "stupid" - why do you believe this?
Your citation of OPEC is flawed as well because OPEC acts as a single entity in a market where other entities exist. In the case of oil, OPEC is a single country in a market where the US buys from other producers as well. And finally, "shit happens man"? Yes, shit does happen. No need to comment on it if that's all the comment you have.
Well, this story stems from the overused example of probability when applied to the infinite so I can understand how it relates to nerds if your particular nerd bent is focused on mathematics and/or theoretical computer science. I think that the implication of the whole thing is that the example doesn't hold up as well as one would like. Since the monkeys aren't generating truly random data, then one can't conclude that the works of Shakespeare will ever be produced. But it was always just a cute example where the monkeys were merely random generators of letters. Given the first letter of the first work of Shakespeare, there is a probability that a random letter generator will spit that letter out. From there, we continue through the entire works of Shakespeare and, if we produce all possible combinations of X letters (where X is the total number of letters in all of Shakespeare's work), one of those combinations is the correct result. Long story short, I think this is Slashdot-worthy.
Where did I say anything about glossing over problems? There is a certain way to behave in polite society about mentioning being "bent over", implying anal sex, is not part of that behavior. Do you honestly think it's appropriate to discuss anal sex with the CEO of this company?
Clear communication? You mean crude language. And you can communicate in a clear manner without being reduced to using sexual terms or terms that use rather foul language. I think that if you are reduced to using terms like BS and "bent over", then your language skills are lacking and you should read a few books that aren't related to the tech field. They will do wonders for your vocabulary.
This is the wrong approach to take. You don't need to argue about the pitfalls of closed source software. Assuming managers are aware of what they're managing, they already know the problems. You need to tell them how open source avoids these problems and, furthermore, explain to them how other problems they might foresee would not arise with open source. The manager needs some guarantees on their software and someone to blame when things go wrong - point them to the support offered by Redhat or MySQL.
Also, if you're talking to your manager about being "bent over" and using the term "BS", you're not in the most professional of atmospheres and might consider getting out.
Webads don't bring in very much? Where are you getting your data? I believe you can search Slashdot and find an article from a month or two back regarding the New York times turning their online prescence into a money making venture (and not money making in the sense of $0.01 over the line, but real money) because of the advertisements.
Just because a fact used to be a fact, doesn't mean it always will be.
What are you talking about? This whole analogy thing has gotten out of control but here you go; a car without gas will not operate. It ceases to serve its purpose at that point. A computer without some variant of Windows can still function quite well - go to google and search for operating systems. You'll find plenty that aren't MS. You do not NEED Windows in order for your computer to run. And if your argument is going to be that Microsoft and Intel are going to get so closely in bed that without Windows, a computer won't function - then I submit to you AMD. There are alternatives out there and therefore gas to car is flawed.
Even when you no longer need line of sight, there's still a rather large amount of time that needs to take place for the signal to travel from origin to destination.
Remote medical treatment won't be possible in the situation you describe because of this time, using current conventional methods. Now, if Arthur Clarke's 'The Light of Other Days' comes to pass, there won't be any trouble whatsoever because a hole will just be opened up on both ends and then we've got instantaneous transmissions.
The Gamecube over the PS2? You can't be serious. The Gamecube is a less powerful system than the PS2. Just because the GC was released later doesn't mean it's a better powerhouse. I'm not some Sony fanboy (I have, of course, owned plenty of Nintendo consoles in my day) but the GC was developed with off the shelf and inferior parts. Sony dumped about 2 billion dollars into R&D on the PS2 and it's a much better system, in terms of power.
I cite this article. Read it, it's amusing and informative. (Oh and check out the rest of the site - Gord rules.)
Nintendo wants to highlight the multiplayer aspect? That's all well and good but is there an online prescence expected for the Gamecube? To me, if a game is multiplayer these days - that means network play - not four controllers plugged into the same console.
I have a network adapter for my PS2 and it's great! I can't think of any Starfox-like games that are already available for the other consoles as online games so if Nintendo doesn't release it to play online, they're missing out.
Poor programming practice? Apparently you've never done any serious programming. Programming is all about tradeoffs. Sometimes you make sacrifices in order to get the job done. If it comes down to making a sacrifice to get the job done and not getting the job done at all, I figure out how to shoehorn the solution into the system.
This is part of the reason that much commercial software has so many problems. The consumer wants their programs cheap and they want their programs released two weeks ago. Sacrifices in the development and testing cycles are constantly being made in order to bring the product in at a lower cost and in a shorter timeframe.
So if NT came with the source, you'd have the time and education to go through, what, 29 million lines of code, and fix the problems?
And where do you see these guarantees concerning software being "good enough to bet your business on"? I've bought a lot of software in my time and I've never seen that claim printed on the box.
"We say: 'Give me the phone that takes the picture. Don't give me wireless security!"'
Most people have no understanding of how programming works and what is entailed by the process. Thus, they don't want to pay the price tag on a product that is developed using rigorous standards and adequate design and testing cycles. But they want the companies to be liable? Also something to consider is the fact that many problems cost as a result of user misuse. While erroneous input should be considered, the range of all possible user inputs, behaviors, and system setups can't always be considered. People just don't get it and think they're owed money because their application crashed when they didn't configure it correctly.
From the article:"It helps reduce latency in data transfers between systems by directly placing data from one system's main memory to another's without the need for extensive buffering or CPU intervention."
The approach you describe relies on CPU intervention on both ends of the connection. The article describes an approach that is much closer to the actual hardware than simply opening a ssh connection. I hope this clears the issue up for you!
Yes, there are security implications but here's the point: there are security implications for a lot of applications written for your computer. These obviously have to be taken into account but just because there are risks involved doesn't mean that attempting an implementation should entirely be avoided. I mean, there are security implications for running a web server (especially an out of date one with exploits all over the place); does that mean no one should run a web server?
I think that shared memory across a network is doable but, like all initial attempts, bugs will exist. But the benefits of having shared memory like this outweight the drawbacks of having a hard problem to solve.
I read your post and I thought it was a good point. This type of research does make steps towards the colonization of other planets BUT...just as I was having joy joy feelings about the human race's pursuit of more knowledge and more understanding, I read the post beneath yours: "Suck my big black penis". Perhaps the human race should just stick to Earth and not befoul any other planets?
I think you're overestimating this "force." EMI is not forced into doing this. Sure, dropping sales figures are bad news to deliver to stockholders and the board BUT saying they are forced into this online model is just wrong. There are many other options open to a record company whose sales are declining. They can cut fat from the budget, go after the pirates with lawsuits, sign fewer artists, spend less on promotion, spend more on promotion, etc.
Your original post said that EMI had to change their business method. I believe this is wrong. It is because of the various reasons in the sales drop (which you call irrelevant) that they are not forced to confront an online model. There are many reasons for the sales drop and that is why there are still many options for a company. In short, EMI doesn't go bankrupt if they don't have an online sales system.
Did I say anything about piracy? That's not the issue.
That is the issue!!! Have you been living under a rock? The record companies have repeatedly said that the only reason sales are down is because of online piracy. They ignore issues like the economy, the quality of the product, competition from independant acts, etc., etc. Your belief that since sales are down 10%, they'll be out of business in ten years is wrong.
Here you go. So last year they sold 1,000 units (for ease of calculation).
Year 1: They sell 900 units. (1000 - 1000 *.10)
year 2: They sell 810 units. (900 - 900 *.10)
etc.
As you can see, this does not lead to selling no units and therefore in ten years they are still in business. I just wanted to clear this up because this calculation you've decided to do is making so many assumptions that it's worthless as any type of indication. You shouldn't believe that because sales are down 10% worldwide, record companies are forced to do anything about this. It may be that they can continue selling in their current method and that a threshold has been reached where sales will remain the same. There's a lot more to what drives a global industry and both you and the RIAA are making huge assumptions that shouldn't be made. Your assumptions I don't really care about; you can have whatever theories you want. What bothers me is that the RIAA has legislators convinced that it's because of online piracy that the sales are down not mismanagement, a poor economy, or a lack of artists with talent.
Finally, I stand by my desire to see the record companies go broke and artists selling their own music.
Go out of business? Listen, the record companies aren't as poor as they want to make themselves out to be. Record sales are supposedly down but that can't be blamed entirely on internet piracy. CD prices are up and quality is down as well. Yet the RIAA is so sure that music piracy is why they're not selling as much of their shit as they used to. I don't believe it. I'd download music and violate copyright law, if there were any being produced that was worth the bandwidth.
What is a lot more important than EMI selling their product online is lone artists selling theirs. With the widespread acceptance of the internet as a means of commerce, there will, hopefully, come a time when there's no need for the middleman. I'd much rather pay ten bucks to an artist and have that artist get all the money than make some fat cat asshole a little bit richer.
Of course, I'm still waiting on something worth buying but that's another problem altogether - and one the RIAA doesn't care about - they'll market the shit out of the shit they've got and bribe politicians into making laws that lead to suits which will finance their lifestyles since the music isn't good enough to sell anymore.
Yes, that's a very mature viewpoint to take. Wanting someone dead for dealings in business? You might be trying to exagerate for some type of effect, I'm not sure what that might be, but it's really inappropriate. When someone dies there are serious consequences and I don't think it's right to make jokes about death.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant "company", not country. And I wasn't speaking literally but since all OPEC members agree to the same production and price levels, OPEC can be viewed as a single company.
Now, getting to your comment that price fixing laws are "stupid" - why do you believe this?
Your citation of OPEC is flawed as well because OPEC acts as a single entity in a market where other entities exist. In the case of oil, OPEC is a single country in a market where the US buys from other producers as well. And finally, "shit happens man"? Yes, shit does happen. No need to comment on it if that's all the comment you have.
Well, this story stems from the overused example of probability when applied to the infinite so I can understand how it relates to nerds if your particular nerd bent is focused on mathematics and/or theoretical computer science. I think that the implication of the whole thing is that the example doesn't hold up as well as one would like. Since the monkeys aren't generating truly random data, then one can't conclude that the works of Shakespeare will ever be produced. But it was always just a cute example where the monkeys were merely random generators of letters. Given the first letter of the first work of Shakespeare, there is a probability that a random letter generator will spit that letter out. From there, we continue through the entire works of Shakespeare and, if we produce all possible combinations of X letters (where X is the total number of letters in all of Shakespeare's work), one of those combinations is the correct result. Long story short, I think this is Slashdot-worthy.
Again, there's a difference between an informal setting such as Slashdot and the professional setting that a workplace should be.
Where did I say anything about glossing over problems? There is a certain way to behave in polite society about mentioning being "bent over", implying anal sex, is not part of that behavior. Do you honestly think it's appropriate to discuss anal sex with the CEO of this company?
Clear communication? You mean crude language. And you can communicate in a clear manner without being reduced to using sexual terms or terms that use rather foul language. I think that if you are reduced to using terms like BS and "bent over", then your language skills are lacking and you should read a few books that aren't related to the tech field. They will do wonders for your vocabulary.
Also, if you're talking to your manager about being "bent over" and using the term "BS", you're not in the most professional of atmospheres and might consider getting out.
Just because a fact used to be a fact, doesn't mean it always will be.
Still flawed; the computer is still operating you just can't take it on all the roads you would like.
What are you talking about? This whole analogy thing has gotten out of control but here you go; a car without gas will not operate. It ceases to serve its purpose at that point. A computer without some variant of Windows can still function quite well - go to google and search for operating systems. You'll find plenty that aren't MS. You do not NEED Windows in order for your computer to run. And if your argument is going to be that Microsoft and Intel are going to get so closely in bed that without Windows, a computer won't function - then I submit to you AMD. There are alternatives out there and therefore gas to car is flawed.
Remote medical treatment won't be possible in the situation you describe because of this time, using current conventional methods. Now, if Arthur Clarke's 'The Light of Other Days' comes to pass, there won't be any trouble whatsoever because a hole will just be opened up on both ends and then we've got instantaneous transmissions.
I cite this article. Read it, it's amusing and informative. (Oh and check out the rest of the site - Gord rules.)
I have a network adapter for my PS2 and it's great!
I can't think of any Starfox-like games that are already available for the other consoles as online games so if Nintendo doesn't release it to play online, they're missing out.
This is part of the reason that much commercial software has so many problems. The consumer wants their programs cheap and they want their programs released two weeks ago. Sacrifices in the development and testing cycles are constantly being made in order to bring the product in at a lower cost and in a shorter timeframe.
And where do you see these guarantees concerning software being "good enough to bet your business on"? I've bought a lot of software in my time and I've never seen that claim printed on the box.
The approach you describe relies on CPU intervention on both ends of the connection. The article describes an approach that is much closer to the actual hardware than simply opening a ssh connection. I hope this clears the issue up for you!
I think that shared memory across a network is doable but, like all initial attempts, bugs will exist. But the benefits of having shared memory like this outweight the drawbacks of having a hard problem to solve.
I read your post and I thought it was a good point. This type of research does make steps towards the colonization of other planets BUT...just as I was having joy joy feelings about the human race's pursuit of more knowledge and more understanding, I read the post beneath yours: "Suck my big black penis". Perhaps the human race should just stick to Earth and not befoul any other planets?
Don't ever claim to know what a company is thinking. It invalidates your argument.
Your original post said that EMI had to change their business method. I believe this is wrong. It is because of the various reasons in the sales drop (which you call irrelevant) that they are not forced to confront an online model. There are many reasons for the sales drop and that is why there are still many options for a company. In short, EMI doesn't go bankrupt if they don't have an online sales system.
Here you go. So last year they sold 1,000 units (for ease of calculation). .10) .10)
Year 1: They sell 900 units. (1000 - 1000 *
year 2: They sell 810 units. (900 - 900 *
etc.
As you can see, this does not lead to selling no units and therefore in ten years they are still in business. I just wanted to clear this up because this calculation you've decided to do is making so many assumptions that it's worthless as any type of indication. You shouldn't believe that because sales are down 10% worldwide, record companies are forced to do anything about this. It may be that they can continue selling in their current method and that a threshold has been reached where sales will remain the same. There's a lot more to what drives a global industry and both you and the RIAA are making huge assumptions that shouldn't be made. Your assumptions I don't really care about; you can have whatever theories you want. What bothers me is that the RIAA has legislators convinced that it's because of online piracy that the sales are down not mismanagement, a poor economy, or a lack of artists with talent.
Finally, I stand by my desire to see the record companies go broke and artists selling their own music.
What is a lot more important than EMI selling their product online is lone artists selling theirs. With the widespread acceptance of the internet as a means of commerce, there will, hopefully, come a time when there's no need for the middleman. I'd much rather pay ten bucks to an artist and have that artist get all the money than make some fat cat asshole a little bit richer.
Of course, I'm still waiting on something worth buying but that's another problem altogether - and one the RIAA doesn't care about - they'll market the shit out of the shit they've got and bribe politicians into making laws that lead to suits which will finance their lifestyles since the music isn't good enough to sell anymore.
Yes, that's a very mature viewpoint to take. Wanting someone dead for dealings in business? You might be trying to exagerate for some type of effect, I'm not sure what that might be, but it's really inappropriate. When someone dies there are serious consequences and I don't think it's right to make jokes about death.
You're a fucking moron.