Back in the 80s I taught myself a new programming language by creating a football game. This was still in the DOS era, so it was very simple graphics of a football field and a football icon that moved forward or back depending on the outcome of the play. It had a scoreboard, running clock, the usual stuff. It was just for fun. But guys at work (where I was doing this -- hey, remember, I was learning a new language for work's sake) saw my program and wanted to play it. So I let them.
I had no intention of sharing it beyond that, but something about using actual NFL teams made me wonder about licensing rights. So I wrote to the NFL and asked them if I wanted to create a private, not-for-profit, not to be spread around game, could I use actual NFL team names? I figured it was a silly question, for why would they object. Probably you are thinking I was an idiot for writing under the universal principle of it's better to be ask forgiveness than to ask permission. Well, I was, but there you are. Anyway, I got a nice letter from NFL headquarters saying, "Thank you for asking, but no, you may not use actual NFL team names since we have entered into exclusive licensing arrangements with game companies." I have no idea which game company (probably early Atari stuff or some nonsense), but the idea of exclusive licensing of NFL names is hardly new. They've been raking in free money on that concept for at least twenty years now.
And no, I didn't change my program. Oh, I tried to make up names like the Comets and the Tigers, but it sounded too hokey, so I left in the real names anyway. NFL lawyers, you may arrest me now.
Cue an endless cycle of/. comments to the effect that wind energy is not as environmentally friendly as you think, and it costs more than you hope, and every other alternative to oil is problematic, and blah, blah, blah.
I'm glad to see research continuing into alternatives. Just because something isn't 100% ready yet is no reason not to pursue it. Just think what weaning the U.S. off oil-dependence (yes, long term thinking here, try not to let your hat fly off your head) would do for its world politics. Whoops. Never mind. This is a message from the oil companies reminding you not to think that way. We now return you to your reality-based TV program.
What you say makes sense, and I believe that I would be wowed at home for I've heard enough people say it that I believe it. But what I meant is that in the store, in admittedly bad conditions, the HD set looks about the same as the non-HD set next to it. You'd think under any circumstances the HD set would outshine a normal set.
"Trix, Lucky Charms, and Twizzlers are to kids as cigarettes, alchohol, and caffiene are to adults. They're addictive and harmful substances that should not be consumed by anyone."
Agreed, which is why they would be a natural fit for the Disney channel which does for the mind what Trix does for the body. When I said "kid-friendly," I meant it is something kids would find appealing to see on TV, not good for them.
They certainly can do what they want, no argument there. I just feel badly for the kids who watch and get fed the message that it's all Disney all the time. What about a Trix commercial? Or Lucky Charms? Or Twizzlers? Aren't those kid-friendly? It doesn't have to be condom commercials, but isn't there anything outside of the Disney orbit that they can advertise?
"Have you seen HD? On a screen bigger than 35", the answer is yes. Smaller than that, only if you're picky."
Every time I go into an electronics store, I make a point to check out the HD sets. And every time I am very underwhelmed, seeing a not especially clear picture. I ask the clerk, "Is this really HD with an HD feed" They always say, "Yup, it is." And I think to myself that it's not that impressive.
So what's going on? Why doesn't it seem that much better? Are the clerks just clueless?
"Yippee! Even more room to store lengthy commercials for other "limited edition gold/platinum" DVDs of re-released animated movies from 40+ years ago. "
Heh, you beat me to it. That was my first thought too. Disney is amazing in its ability to force-feed cross-marketing material at their consumers. I have a couple of young nieces who watch Disney full time, and when I'm over at their house (and thus seeing what's on the Disney channel), I'm always amazed that they exist in a closed universe of Disney material.
The Disney TV show is interrupted by a commercial advertising another upcoming Disney TV show, followed by a "behind the scenes" look at the filming of the latest Disney movie, interrupted with an "insider's access pass" to the music from the latest Disney DVD, along with ads for Disney theme parks, Radio Disney, and now back to our Disney TV show, but first let's meet the backup singers from the new Disney movie.
Yes, I know, the original poster was just quoting from the Thirty-Nine Steps, but I wanted to have fun anyway. And yes, I meant my last line wholeheartedly: it's a great movie. But no, even after watching it you won't know what causes Pip in poultry, sadly.
Thanks. I was just trying to be funny, and as it happens all the mod points I got were for that. "Insightful"? Boy, I sure hope not. If my "reasoning" were ever taken seriously, I would get seriously depressed.
So, Spyware removal is a big business that does not live up to its promise? Sounds like spyware removal is in the same category as late-night informercials to solve household chores, sexual dysfuction, or embarrassing body insufficiencies.
Nope, that's not it. It's the more secure default installations of the OS and standard apps. Don't forget, Apple sells an increasing number of machines. The fact that the worldwide shipment of dirt-cheap clone PCs increased at a faster rate doesn't negate the fact that people traditionally hang on to their Macs longer than people hang on to their PCs. You can easily use a three- or four-year-old Mac with OS X. In fact, it tends to get faster over time as OS X becomes more efficient. Try doing that with a generic Windows box.
So although the new shipment of Apples may rank low in market share, the actual percentage of computers in use is higher than that. And with tens of millions of Mac in daily use, it's a plenty big enough market for spyware. Oops, turns out it's a LOT harder to write successful spyware for a computer where the spyware has to pop up a box asking permission first. Too bad for spyware developers, but happy days for Mac users who don't have to worry about spyware...or viruses.
But hey, the Security By Obscurity argument seems to be fairly common around here. Go ahead, Windows users, keep thinking that the only reason you suffer so much annoyance is because you run a popular OS. The rest of us will just chuckle and keep on not being bothered.
I also use both a PC and a Mac, and I know what you are saying, but it's not the whole story. OS X is just inherently more secure than Windows by default, and you cannot get things to happen automatically on OS X in the same way that you can with Windows along with IE and Outlook. It's not just that there are fewer Macs (only tens of millions instead of hundreds of millions), it's also the more secure default installations.
Just think how un-American Apple computer is. Do Macs contribute to the growing anti-spyware business? Hardly at all! Why almost no money is being made removing spyware from Macs. Why hardly anyone has heard of spyware for Macs in the first place. Can you imagine taking bread from the mouths of the little children of anti-spyware software developers? Won't someone please think of the children?
I think I'll write a version of Lord of the Rings told entirely from the point-of-view of Tom Bombadil:
The Fellowship of the Ring: Bombadil Style -- Tom wanders around the forest singing, and briefly visits with some hobbits carrying a trinket of little interest.
The Two Towers: Neither of Which Bombadil Lives In -- Goldberry makes tasty treats while Tom cleans his boots.
The Return of the King: Someone Bombadil Thinks he Knows -- Tom and Old Man Willow discuss philosophy and sing songs. Some strange doings down south make the sky turn dark, but then it's all light again, and that calls for some drink! The end.
Granted, they did show that, but I know Jackson said they never filmed the Scouring of the Shire. Perhaps the fountain scene showed bits of the burning of Rohan adapted to make it look like the Shire?
"Does anyone know if the EE covers all the stuff with "Mr Sharkey" (have I remembered correctly?) and the Shire? Did they even film that stuff?"
They did not film any of the Scouring of the Shire, so no, you won't find that in the EE. I'm not saying I agree with their decision, as I found that chapter in the book to be the perfect way to show the changes in the Shire during their absence, and how evil crept in even there. But I am sympathetic to the idea that movies are not the same thing as books, and I at least understand their motive in not creating another conflict after the big resolution earlier. I know I personally got tired of all those "7 endings" wisecracks. I can only imagine the complaints from people if the Scouring of the Shire were in the movie after what they thought was the ending.
But for all you purists out there, I can tell you one thing with certainty: That chapter is right where it always was, in the book.
"I've been truly stunned at just how nice, and helpful, people in the "Apple Community" tend to be."
Me too. Oh sure, in any large group there are the trolls and rude people. But by and large you get very helpful responses from the Apple community. I think part of it is the perceived niche status. People who feel they need to stick together to help each other out often do try to be more helpful.
Another part of it is there are fewer resources available for the Apple crowd compared to the Windows crowd, so there seems to be a feeling of 'Well, this site is fairly rare, better make it a good one.' So you get fewer resources, but often the quality of them equals the best of the Windows resources. End result: You have what you need.
And there has to be a sociological aspect to it as well. Apple users must be a self-selected subset of society, a group that is similar to, say, BMW or Mercedes buyers. People who like well-crafted machinery, good performance, ease of use. The kind of person who is drawn to these qualities may also tend to be helpful to their fellow Apple- (or BMW-) owner.
Government propping up private enterprise
on
U.S. to Get New IP Czar
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"While congressional aides said there was a lot of support for the program, its inclusion still raised some eyebrows as there have been questions about the government's involvement in protecting a private, for-profit enterprise.
A recent congressional attempt to approve legislation known as the "Pirate Act," which would allow the Justice Department to file civil lawsuits, was turned back over complaints that it would advance Hollywood's interest at taxpayer expense.
"This isn't the Pirate Act, but I think the taxpayers would be surprised that there's money being spent for copyright enforcement when terrorists and criminals still roam the streets," said Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit fair-use advocacy group Public Knowledge. "When every dollar is being counted for education, health care and homeland security, it seems like a strange priority."
Indeed, it's funny how certain industries always seem to get government help when they need it. Must be nice. "Lesse, my business is suffering because of competitors who won't play by my rules. I could try to out market them, or out produce them, or enforce my own rules, or, wait a minute! I know! I'll just cut a check to my congresscritter and get them to do my job for me! Whee! Ain't America grand!"
Maybe that's why the article began this way:
"Buried inside the massive $388 billion spending bill Congress approved last weekend is a program that creates a federal copyright enforcement czar. "
Yeah, better not let this one see too much of the light of day. Just bury it in the spending bill that has to pass.
Slashdot Mirror
I had no intention of sharing it beyond that, but something about using actual NFL teams made me wonder about licensing rights. So I wrote to the NFL and asked them if I wanted to create a private, not-for-profit, not to be spread around game, could I use actual NFL team names? I figured it was a silly question, for why would they object. Probably you are thinking I was an idiot for writing under the universal principle of it's better to be ask forgiveness than to ask permission. Well, I was, but there you are. Anyway, I got a nice letter from NFL headquarters saying, "Thank you for asking, but no, you may not use actual NFL team names since we have entered into exclusive licensing arrangements with game companies." I have no idea which game company (probably early Atari stuff or some nonsense), but the idea of exclusive licensing of NFL names is hardly new. They've been raking in free money on that concept for at least twenty years now.
And no, I didn't change my program. Oh, I tried to make up names like the Comets and the Tigers, but it sounded too hokey, so I left in the real names anyway. NFL lawyers, you may arrest me now.
I'm glad to see research continuing into alternatives. Just because something isn't 100% ready yet is no reason not to pursue it. Just think what weaning the U.S. off oil-dependence (yes, long term thinking here, try not to let your hat fly off your head) would do for its world politics. Whoops. Never mind. This is a message from the oil companies reminding you not to think that way. We now return you to your reality-based TV program.
"Get the person something THEY want, not something YOU think they want."
Leading to the obvious question...
What you say makes sense, and I believe that I would be wowed at home for I've heard enough people say it that I believe it. But what I meant is that in the store, in admittedly bad conditions, the HD set looks about the same as the non-HD set next to it. You'd think under any circumstances the HD set would outshine a normal set.
Agreed, which is why they would be a natural fit for the Disney channel which does for the mind what Trix does for the body. When I said "kid-friendly," I meant it is something kids would find appealing to see on TV, not good for them.
They certainly can do what they want, no argument there. I just feel badly for the kids who watch and get fed the message that it's all Disney all the time. What about a Trix commercial? Or Lucky Charms? Or Twizzlers? Aren't those kid-friendly? It doesn't have to be condom commercials, but isn't there anything outside of the Disney orbit that they can advertise?
Every time I go into an electronics store, I make a point to check out the HD sets. And every time I am very underwhelmed, seeing a not especially clear picture. I ask the clerk, "Is this really HD with an HD feed" They always say, "Yup, it is." And I think to myself that it's not that impressive.
So what's going on? Why doesn't it seem that much better? Are the clerks just clueless?
Heh, you beat me to it. That was my first thought too. Disney is amazing in its ability to force-feed cross-marketing material at their consumers. I have a couple of young nieces who watch Disney full time, and when I'm over at their house (and thus seeing what's on the Disney channel), I'm always amazed that they exist in a closed universe of Disney material.
The Disney TV show is interrupted by a commercial advertising another upcoming Disney TV show, followed by a "behind the scenes" look at the filming of the latest Disney movie, interrupted with an "insider's access pass" to the music from the latest Disney DVD, along with ads for Disney theme parks, Radio Disney, and now back to our Disney TV show, but first let's meet the backup singers from the new Disney movie.
After that I just want to retch in technicolor...
Thank you for taking the time to tell me. That's what I was trying to do, and it's good to hear.
And for a convenience, it will automatically correct your spelling as follows:
Yes, I know, the original poster was just quoting from the Thirty-Nine Steps, but I wanted to have fun anyway. And yes, I meant my last line wholeheartedly: it's a great movie. But no, even after watching it you won't know what causes Pip in poultry, sadly.
When chickens read Great Expectations.
How old is Mae West?
She's dead. But you're still welcome to come up and see her sometime.
Who was the last British heavyweight champion of the world?
Doesn't matter, the Irish still didn't recognize him.
How far is Winnipeg from Montreal?
It's too cold to tell now; ask again in summer.
When did Florence Nightingale die?
When her life ended.
What is the height of the Empire State Building? What was the date of General Gordon's death?
Is there a connection between the two?
What are the Thirty-Nine Steps? Come on! Answer up! What are the Thirty-Nine Steps?
Here ya go. Bring popcorn, it's great.
Thanks. I was just trying to be funny, and as it happens all the mod points I got were for that. "Insightful"? Boy, I sure hope not. If my "reasoning" were ever taken seriously, I would get seriously depressed.
So, Spyware removal is a big business that does not live up to its promise? Sounds like spyware removal is in the same category as late-night informercials to solve household chores, sexual dysfuction, or embarrassing body insufficiencies.
So although the new shipment of Apples may rank low in market share, the actual percentage of computers in use is higher than that. And with tens of millions of Mac in daily use, it's a plenty big enough market for spyware. Oops, turns out it's a LOT harder to write successful spyware for a computer where the spyware has to pop up a box asking permission first. Too bad for spyware developers, but happy days for Mac users who don't have to worry about spyware...or viruses.
But hey, the Security By Obscurity argument seems to be fairly common around here. Go ahead, Windows users, keep thinking that the only reason you suffer so much annoyance is because you run a popular OS. The rest of us will just chuckle and keep on not being bothered.
I also use both a PC and a Mac, and I know what you are saying, but it's not the whole story. OS X is just inherently more secure than Windows by default, and you cannot get things to happen automatically on OS X in the same way that you can with Windows along with IE and Outlook. It's not just that there are fewer Macs (only tens of millions instead of hundreds of millions), it's also the more secure default installations.
Just think how un-American Apple computer is. Do Macs contribute to the growing anti-spyware business? Hardly at all! Why almost no money is being made removing spyware from Macs. Why hardly anyone has heard of spyware for Macs in the first place. Can you imagine taking bread from the mouths of the little children of anti-spyware software developers? Won't someone please think of the children?
The Fellowship of the Ring: Bombadil Style -- Tom wanders around the forest singing, and briefly visits with some hobbits carrying a trinket of little interest.
The Two Towers: Neither of Which Bombadil Lives In -- Goldberry makes tasty treats while Tom cleans his boots.
The Return of the King: Someone Bombadil Thinks he Knows -- Tom and Old Man Willow discuss philosophy and sing songs. Some strange doings down south make the sky turn dark, but then it's all light again, and that calls for some drink! The end.
Granted, they did show that, but I know Jackson said they never filmed the Scouring of the Shire. Perhaps the fountain scene showed bits of the burning of Rohan adapted to make it look like the Shire?
They did not film any of the Scouring of the Shire, so no, you won't find that in the EE. I'm not saying I agree with their decision, as I found that chapter in the book to be the perfect way to show the changes in the Shire during their absence, and how evil crept in even there. But I am sympathetic to the idea that movies are not the same thing as books, and I at least understand their motive in not creating another conflict after the big resolution earlier. I know I personally got tired of all those "7 endings" wisecracks. I can only imagine the complaints from people if the Scouring of the Shire were in the movie after what they thought was the ending.
But for all you purists out there, I can tell you one thing with certainty: That chapter is right where it always was, in the book.
Painful double-entendre there, Mr. Editor!
Me too. Oh sure, in any large group there are the trolls and rude people. But by and large you get very helpful responses from the Apple community. I think part of it is the perceived niche status. People who feel they need to stick together to help each other out often do try to be more helpful.
Another part of it is there are fewer resources available for the Apple crowd compared to the Windows crowd, so there seems to be a feeling of 'Well, this site is fairly rare, better make it a good one.' So you get fewer resources, but often the quality of them equals the best of the Windows resources. End result: You have what you need.
And there has to be a sociological aspect to it as well. Apple users must be a self-selected subset of society, a group that is similar to, say, BMW or Mercedes buyers. People who like well-crafted machinery, good performance, ease of use. The kind of person who is drawn to these qualities may also tend to be helpful to their fellow Apple- (or BMW-) owner.
"This isn't the Pirate Act, but I think the taxpayers would be surprised that there's money being spent for copyright enforcement when terrorists and criminals still roam the streets," said Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit fair-use advocacy group Public Knowledge. "When every dollar is being counted for education, health care and homeland security, it seems like a strange priority."
Indeed, it's funny how certain industries always seem to get government help when they need it. Must be nice. "Lesse, my business is suffering because of competitors who won't play by my rules. I could try to out market them, or out produce them, or enforce my own rules, or, wait a minute! I know! I'll just cut a check to my congresscritter and get them to do my job for me! Whee! Ain't America grand!"
Maybe that's why the article began this way:
"Buried inside the massive $388 billion spending bill Congress approved last weekend is a program that creates a federal copyright enforcement czar. "
Yeah, better not let this one see too much of the light of day. Just bury it in the spending bill that has to pass.
anD We WiLl kilL yOuR dOg UnLESs yoU pAy thE RAnSoM, KeNJA akA Dr. DaISy WhEEl
Patent Examiner: Uh, hi again. What is it this time? Weren't you just here yesterday? And the day before that? And the day before that?
Microsoft: Yes, but that's because I'm just so full of innovation! I'm just bursting with new ideas.
Patent Examiner: *sigh* OK, so what have you "innovated" today?
Microsoft: This (handing paper over). It's a patent idea!
Patent Examiner (looking at paper): Is not.
Microsoft: Yup, IsNot!
Patent Examiner: No, is not a patent!
Microsoft: That's great news. Thanks!
Patent Examiner: *sigh*