Lower costs ARE being passed on to the consumer.
on
Cheap Audio Production
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Look at it two ways:
1. People who never could afford to record before now can. 2. You can get lots and lots and lots of LEGAL music for free, because of those lowered costs.
If I had to pay for a studio every time I wanted to record something... well I wouldn't.
Only by hooking up with PayPal or some other company that instantly lets its customers use Peppercoin will they get the huge userbase they need to entice merchants.
Who wants to offer merchandise to a possible customer base in the mere thousands, most of whom will never find your site on the 'net and even if they do won't be interested?
Lots of music, all free, all independent. Lots of crap, but it's not *all* crap, and there are ratings. Hit the "top songs" link, and I guarantee you'll find something you can dig.
www.somesongs.com
And yeah, I'm on there too, so this is a self-serving plug. *shrug*
Good stuff, cheap. Er, free. Click the "Top Songs" link on the right-hand side to see the songs that have the highest rating. Or any number of other options. It's a cool site, ad-free, for the love of music.
There are a bunch of other sites for finding interesting songs, if you have time to listen to a lot of stuff. They aren't "official", they're all amateur, but they're lovingly crafted with your entertainment in mind. There are links to a bunch of them on http://www.songfight.net
Maybe a slashdotter or two will find somebody new whose music speaks to them.
A lot of comments here are focusing on how to get the viewer to recognize what station she's watching.
But they don't care if you know what station you're watching if you don't watch the advertisements.
Brand loyalty/recognition for TV is just a method to get you to watch the ads on a specific network as opposed to any other. That's all. If you watch NBC exclusively but don't watch their ads, that's just as bad to them as if you didn't know what channel you were watching.
Luckily, for now there's no way for them to know if we're watching an ad or not, so the Ad Companies are still paying for every viewer of a show.
Has there ever been a time when more scientific effort was expended trying to *prevent* us from doing things rather than trying to *enable* us to do things?
I think a lot of the old games are still a lot of fun to play. Pong is deceptively simple, especially if it allows you to use english and stuff. You can really play a lot of psychological games to try and beat your opponent. And it included all those variations, with obstacles and a speeding up ball and stuff.
The old games are, as you said, simpler. But like checkers, they are variations on themes that have been around for a long time and kind of permeate American and other cultures. Kind of like human archetypes. That reminds me... Archon would be an awesome multiplayer net game.
Possible applications for the memory include hand-held computers and mobile phones, which require large amounts of memory in a compact form.
Of course, hand-held computers and mobile phones will find these things useful. But certainly nothing else might. Certainly not EVERY COMPUTER ON THE DAMN PLANET. Where do they get these people?
They're called "early adopters" and they're the sort of people who already have an HDTV set, and are frothing at the mouth to be able to record "Everybody Loves Raymond" in super high fidelity.
Most of the posts (up to this one) seem to have neglected the fact that these tapes will allow you to record HDTV in actual High Definition. That's kind of the point. And $2000 is really kind of cheap for the first release of a new technology. Remember how expensive calculators used to be? Apple computers?
If you set aside the whole "copy protection" and "transmission over the Internet" issues, this is actually kind of cool. Sure it would be better to have a DVD-RW that could record HDTV, but that's not possible right now-- even with compression.
I regret that the folks who announced this technology felt that they had to address those issues. And even though they brought it up first, I'm pretty disappointed that when something like this emerges, it's immediately criticized from the perspective of "they're trying to keep us from copying stuff willy nilly", rather than as a new technology that will allow us to do something we couldn't before: preserve HDTV broadcasts at home in High Definition.
Saying the researchers should get the cash even though they're not in the contest is like saying I should win prizes because I played along with Wheel of Fortune.
The reason I've seen that makes sense to me, posted on Slashdot under another thread, is that this first addition to the TLDs is sort of a "proof of concept" of the process for adding new TLDs. That's why it's limited, and that's why they are being so very careful about who is allowed to administrate the new domains. If it works this time around, they will expand the system.
Slashdot Mirror
Look at it two ways:
o rg
1. People who never could afford to record before now can.
2. You can get lots and lots and lots of LEGAL music for free, because of those lowered costs.
If I had to pay for a studio every time I wanted to record something... well I wouldn't.
http://www.somesongs.com
http://www.songfight.
Free music by real people.
At least not until it hits some critical mass.
Only by hooking up with PayPal or some other company that instantly lets its customers use Peppercoin will they get the huge userbase they need to entice merchants.
Who wants to offer merchandise to a possible customer base in the mere thousands, most of whom will never find your site on the 'net and even if they do won't be interested?
Lots of music, all free, all independent. Lots of crap, but it's not *all* crap, and there are ratings. Hit the "top songs" link, and I guarantee you'll find something you can dig.
www.somesongs.com
And yeah, I'm on there too, so this is a self-serving plug. *shrug*
1. Well-made
2. Cheap
3. Fast
Pick two. In this case we'd choose options 1 and 3. Or like the exchange in the preview for soon-to-bomb "The Core" (paraphrased):
guy #1: "How much would it cost to finish your boring machine in three months?"
guy #2: "50 billion dollars."
guy #1: "Will you take a check?"
http://www.somesongs.com
Good stuff, cheap. Er, free. Click the "Top Songs" link on the right-hand side to see the songs that have the highest rating. Or any number of other options. It's a cool site, ad-free, for the love of music.
There are a bunch of other sites for finding interesting songs, if you have time to listen to a lot of stuff. They aren't "official", they're all amateur, but they're lovingly crafted with your entertainment in mind. There are links to a bunch of them on http://www.songfight.net
Maybe a slashdotter or two will find somebody new whose music speaks to them.
Go nuts:
m a lot.comn orama.comt p://www.songfight.nett ml
http://www.somesongs.com
http://www.actdead.co
http://www.frankiebigface.com
http://www.front
http://www.brick-pig.com
http://www.joh
http://www.raisedbywolvesmusic.com
ht
http://catrec.com/catrec.h
...is to pay a reasonable price for the shows we want to watch, without commercials. Screw the channels and the commercials.
...when they pry it from my cold, dead hand.
...that you have a terabyte worth of MP3s. Unless you mean "under a 16th of a second". :)
A lot of comments here are focusing on how to get the viewer to recognize what station she's watching.
But they don't care if you know what station you're watching if you don't watch the advertisements.
Brand loyalty/recognition for TV is just a method to get you to watch the ads on a specific network as opposed to any other. That's all. If you watch NBC exclusively but don't watch their ads, that's just as bad to them as if you didn't know what channel you were watching.
Luckily, for now there's no way for them to know if we're watching an ad or not, so the Ad Companies are still paying for every viewer of a show.
Things can't be "previously extinct."
Once you're extinct, you're extinct. Things can, however, be "previously thought to be extinct."
Has there ever been a time when more scientific effort was expended trying to *prevent* us from doing things rather than trying to *enable* us to do things?
Quick search on Google:
Lord of the Rings-- 314,000 hits
Tolkien-- 162,000
Hobbit-- 97,600
Star Wars Movie-- 441,000
Star Wars George Lucas-- 76,500
movie "Star Wars"-- 375,000
You buy a car... it starts breaking down... you have to buy a new car. Or, you can pay them continually for replacement parts.
Hell, the same thing goes for toasters.
Microsoft is just trying to replicate the standard model of *physical* products in the realm of *intellectual* products.
I think a lot of the old games are still a lot of fun to play. Pong is deceptively simple, especially if it allows you to use english and stuff. You can really play a lot of psychological games to try and beat your opponent. And it included all those variations, with obstacles and a speeding up ball and stuff.
The old games are, as you said, simpler. But like checkers, they are variations on themes that have been around for a long time and kind of permeate American and other cultures. Kind of like human archetypes. That reminds me... Archon would be an awesome multiplayer net game.
It's a significant American achievement-- one that changed the world. We should take that day and remember it. And take the day off, of course.
Possible applications for the memory include hand-held computers and mobile phones, which require large amounts of memory in a compact form.
Of course, hand-held computers and mobile phones will find these things useful. But certainly nothing else might. Certainly not EVERY COMPUTER ON THE DAMN PLANET. Where do they get these people?
the domain holders, a fan club, won their arbitration. http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/02/07/spring steen.net/index.html
They're called "early adopters" and they're the sort of people who already have an HDTV set, and are frothing at the mouth to be able to record "Everybody Loves Raymond" in super high fidelity.
Most of the posts (up to this one) seem to have neglected the fact that these tapes will allow you to record HDTV in actual High Definition. That's kind of the point. And $2000 is really kind of cheap for the first release of a new technology. Remember how expensive calculators used to be? Apple computers?
If you set aside the whole "copy protection" and "transmission over the Internet" issues, this is actually kind of cool. Sure it would be better to have a DVD-RW that could record HDTV, but that's not possible right now-- even with compression.
I regret that the folks who announced this technology felt that they had to address those issues. And even though they brought it up first, I'm pretty disappointed that when something like this emerges, it's immediately criticized from the perspective of "they're trying to keep us from copying stuff willy nilly", rather than as a new technology that will allow us to do something we couldn't before: preserve HDTV broadcasts at home in High Definition.
'nuff said.
It doesn't prove that "most" teachers anything. It proves that one teacher underestimated his students.
whoa!
...will be LAIM.
hehe.
;)
Saying the researchers should get the cash even though they're not in the contest is like saying I should win prizes because I played along with Wheel of Fortune.
The reason I've seen that makes sense to me, posted on Slashdot under another thread, is that this first addition to the TLDs is sort of a "proof of concept" of the process for adding new TLDs. That's why it's limited, and that's why they are being so very careful about who is allowed to administrate the new domains. If it works this time around, they will expand the system.