The average starting salary offer for Stanford graduate students has raised 30% in the last hour, as Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo each vied tooth and nail for their services.
no, it's subtle. It's about size of a web-page, serer load, etc. And it's too big, long, clunky. What idiot would put a 'see below' in a mastercard flash-screen-based and simplistic commercial?
And now you've trolled me twice while not even attempting to understand it. It's like... an onion. It has layers. See, trolls are like... wait, no, trolls aren't like... oh damn... bah.
I'm done with this argument.
Graduate School at UC Berkeley : 100,00$ Summer spent researching anti-spyware : 1,000$ after grants Doing the world a favor : 0$ in debt Getting publicity for doing the world a favor among those who care : See Below Having your.8 MB file downloaded 100,000 times in the course of twenty minutes, taxing your web server extensively because you set it up there as a PDF, making you look like mildly silly because you're DOING INTERNET RESEARCH : Priceless, except for the bandwidth.
That said, it's quite an interesting approach. The notification style for a hash is quite an interesting idea.
If there is no financial incentive to create new works, there will be very little new work. At the same time content owners want to charge an arm and a leg for their stuff, restrict when/how/where you can use it, and try to charge you every time you instance their product. It's no surprise that the average person finds other avenues to get their content
At no time in recorded human history has there been 'No Art.' In fact, our first recordings ARE art. And, amusingly, my guess is that there has been no time in human history when there were LESS artists per capita than in the U.S. today. Looking at modern media, most of our 'artistic' endeavors have become passive. This is a direct opposition to our history, where many of our founding fathers / early settlers were highly creative in one way or another.
How many Apple users do you know that care what kind of processor is in their machine? That's the whole idea behind a Mac, really : WYWIWYG. Who wants to deal with a pile of stuff behind the scenes if the only 'mechanical' part (including the back-end software) you need to know anything about is the power switch?
"National prohibition of file swapping (1999-)--the "noble experiment" -- was undertaken to make earning a living easier for artists, increase the feasibility of living upon one's art, and improve well-being in America by enhancing trade. The results of that experiment clearly indicate that it was a miserable failure on all counts. The evidence affirms sound economic theory, which predicts that prohibition of mutually beneficial exchanges is doomed to failure
The lessons of Prohibition remain important today. They apply not only to the debate over the war on file swapping but also to the mounting efforts to drastically reduce access to file swapping and to such issues as censorship and bans on insider trading, abortion, and gambling.
Although consumption of illegal music fell at the beginning of Prohibition, it subsequently increased. Files became more filled with bugs and spyware; crime increased and became "organized"; the court and prison systems found it infeasible to even prosecute; and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in art quality or artists' standard of living. Prohibition removed a significant source of tax revenue and greatly increased government spending. It led many listeners to switch to Brittney Spears, Ashlee Simpson, NSYNC, The Backstreet Boys and other dangerously stupid artists that they would have been unlikely to encounter in the absence of Copyright law. Those results are documented from a variety of sources, most of which, ironically, are the work of supporters of Copyright Law--most economists and social scientists supported it. Their findings make the case against Copyright Law that
much stronger."
I agree that this argument, as a snippet, is still a little lacking. However, the fundamental problems originally addressed by copyright protection as well as patent protection are no longer handled by said laws.
Okay, I have a question. When looking at a Windows box, is there a place I can get a list of the services / processes that SHOULD be running, and a list of those that are spyware? There's a HUGE bunch of junk (as far as I know) chugging along in the background there, and I want to know which pieces are stuff I need and which pieces are stuff I want to eliminate....
Really, now, what else were they going to run all their desktop software on with their IBM PC-AT's in 1987? Minix? CP/M-86?
Hell if I know. There's a lot listed on the OS timeline on wikipedia, but you probably know as well or better than I do on that one... Good call on possibly inaccurate anecdotal evidence. I was thinking more on the OS/2 side - I've been reading a lot of discussions around here about how it had its finer points along with its weaknesses.
I rate profit as market share here. M$ doesn't need the money anymore, they need the visibility in the living room. The XBox was massively profitable on that rating if you consider it as a first-gen console from a producer
Massively harder to hack is due to the online interaction between Xbox and server. And (this is a guess here, but they wouldn't release this type of info until later [except for developers/ providers] anyways) DRM tech naturally thrown on the HD, along with more broadly integrated server / client checking. The XBox was originally produced when security was not as large an issue, and it was too late to implement high security later on. I am betting on that problem being fixed.
Misread a few articles, is my guess. I'd bet on a server touch to check for piracy in any game they sell though. Again, good call on BS, as well. I'm not as educated as I could be on the XBox, but I have read at least 75% of the articles posted on it here, along with 50% of the following commentary in them.
I was attempting to attribute some of the original Xbox's success to the ease of hacking out a way to get free games, and question whether the (to me) obvious modification to the second gen console to disable this particular feature would hurt its sales. Thus I was mentioning 'pay' on the software side. Xbox live? Meh. I still think it's going to be close to required.... The platinum maybe not.
One of my good friends coaches a high school track team. He had kids skipping school to play Halo 2. These aren't hardcore gamers like I was. These are pretty normal kids. Sad commentary upon our culture aside, monopolies aren't instantly born, they're created by slowly seeping in until you're everywhere.
MS has had competitors in the past. Big, strong ones with better products or more recognition or a foot already in the door. But by moving slowly along the line in their own way, they somehow manage to dominate. Xbox was just the first step there, if they're successful. I'm hoping they're not, because they tend to depend upon market dominance accompanied by strong frontmen when they get to where they want to be. (which is an incredibly intelligent strategem - people love these things for some reason) But it's completely possible they will rule the living room like they rule the desktop in ten years....
Did I not say, "I don't own an Xbox?" I swear I did. I was a college student at the time and thirty bucks for a game was an incredible expenditure, like a week's food or more. And two hundred for an x-box? Well, I could afford it if I wanted, but I had better stuff to do. Instead I played with Linux for a while.
Please read the comment CAREFULLY next time before you blast someone. My problem with the Xbox2 is that from what I can tell it is going to be a highly restrictive entertainment environment wherein people are going to learn that information about them being collected is just fine and normal, owning less and less of the content of their entertainment is okay, and futzing around with and being interested in the stuff that runs their entertainment is bad. It's a move towards vegetabledom for the majority of its users.
Standard reply to all these 'Microsoft lost' replies I'm getting:
Microsoft counts market share as a profit. Always has, always will, and it's done them incredibly well.
Their goal in this case is to expand their general control of the desktop into control of the living room. The problem they have is that people have 1) a little more choice at home and 2) a lot less money, so they actually have to be more customer friendly and high quality while working to create cheaper product.
Of course. The funny thing about the Xbox is that it's exactly like DOS was. When I first entered the computer industry, my 'mentor' told me, "The reason everyone used DOS was 'cause you could just copy it and pirate the thing all the time." I don't own an X-box, but the only reason I even CONSIDERED buying one was because if I did I could do what my friend did - rent five games and rip them all. Thus Microsoft profited when they sold him the Xbox, but all the game vendors and developers lost out.
Skip forward four or five years, and Xbox2 comes out. It's a lot harder to hack, (probably close to impossible) and, well, you're going to have to go online to play most games (and almost certainly all the Msoft games) from the specs, so uh... yeah. You have to pay. I hope Xbox2 falls flat on its face, but Microsoft has learned in the home entertainment game, just like they did in the PC game.
What's REALLY funny about this is that it was a joke to start with - ha, ha, Windows == Used Car. But uh... Look at it now. Coughing, sputtering, rusted through on the bottom, suffering from all the sawdust in the engine. Topheavy. Looks to ME like Steve became what he hated. Anyone see "The Graduate"?
Why 'Except in Nebraska?' There's Steve-o, yelling like a used car salesman, but why couldn't he sell Windows in Nebraska? Some sort of consumer protection laws?
Slashdot Mirror
The average starting salary offer for Stanford graduate students has raised 30% in the last hour, as Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo each vied tooth and nail for their services.
(starts filling in application)
I lead to the light side, thank you very much. You and your reverse-polish linguistics lead to frustration and anger.
no, it's subtle. It's about size of a web-page, serer load, etc. And it's too big, long, clunky. What idiot would put a 'see below' in a mastercard flash-screen-based and simplistic commercial?
And now you've trolled me twice while not even attempting to understand it. It's like... an onion. It has layers. See, trolls are like... wait, no, trolls aren't like... oh damn... bah.
I'm done with this argument.
heh. The mac users you know are less technically inept than the ones I know.
And yet it's marked at +4 funny, -2 for 1 offtopic mod. Maybe it's your sense of humor that isn't subtle enough to see all sides of the joke?
Graduate School at UC Berkeley : 100,00$ .8 MB file downloaded 100,000 times in the course of twenty minutes, taxing your web server extensively because you set it up there as a PDF, making you look like mildly silly because you're DOING INTERNET RESEARCH : Priceless, except for the bandwidth.
Summer spent researching anti-spyware : 1,000$ after grants
Doing the world a favor : 0$ in debt
Getting publicity for doing the world a favor among those who care : See Below
Having your
That said, it's quite an interesting approach. The notification style for a hash is quite an interesting idea.
If there is no financial incentive to create new works, there will be very little new work. At the same time content owners want to charge an arm and a leg for their stuff, restrict when/how/where you can use it, and try to charge you every time you instance their product. It's no surprise that the average person finds other avenues to get their content
At no time in recorded human history has there been 'No Art.' In fact, our first recordings ARE art. And, amusingly, my guess is that there has been no time in human history when there were LESS artists per capita than in the U.S. today. Looking at modern media, most of our 'artistic' endeavors have become passive. This is a direct opposition to our history, where many of our founding fathers / early settlers were highly creative in one way or another.
How many Apple users do you know that care what kind of processor is in their machine? That's the whole idea behind a Mac, really : WYWIWYG. Who wants to deal with a pile of stuff behind the scenes if the only 'mechanical' part (including the back-end software) you need to know anything about is the power switch?
I don't like his translation. Here's mine.
"National prohibition of file swapping (1999-)--the "noble experiment" -- was undertaken to make earning a living easier for artists, increase the feasibility of living upon one's art, and improve well-being in America by enhancing trade. The results of that experiment clearly indicate that it was a miserable failure on all counts. The evidence affirms sound economic theory, which predicts that prohibition of mutually beneficial exchanges is doomed to failure
The lessons of Prohibition remain important today. They apply not only to the debate over the war on file swapping but also to the mounting efforts to drastically reduce access to file swapping and to such issues as censorship and bans on insider trading, abortion, and gambling.
Although consumption of illegal music fell at the beginning of Prohibition, it subsequently increased. Files became more filled with bugs and spyware; crime increased and became "organized"; the court and prison systems found it infeasible to even prosecute; and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in art quality or artists' standard of living. Prohibition removed a significant source of tax revenue and greatly increased government spending. It led many listeners to switch to Brittney Spears, Ashlee Simpson, NSYNC, The Backstreet Boys and other dangerously stupid artists that they would have been unlikely to encounter in the absence of Copyright law. Those results are documented from a variety of sources, most of which, ironically, are the work of supporters of Copyright Law--most economists and social scientists supported it. Their findings make the case against Copyright Law that much stronger."
I agree that this argument, as a snippet, is still a little lacking. However, the fundamental problems originally addressed by copyright protection as well as patent protection are no longer handled by said laws.
Okay, I have a question. When looking at a Windows box, is there a place I can get a list of the services / processes that SHOULD be running, and a list of those that are spyware? There's a HUGE bunch of junk (as far as I know) chugging along in the background there, and I want to know which pieces are stuff I need and which pieces are stuff I want to eliminate....
Neat. Thanks. I'm replying to bookmark this somewhere I can find it later. You kick ass.
M$ deserts Intel w/ Xbox 360,
Intel deserts M$ w/ Apple processors.
Seems fair to me.
All these naysayers, and yet every time I ask after a usable linux, someone says, "Ubuntu! Ubuntu! Ubuntu!" It makes me wonder.
Really, now, what else were they going to run all their desktop software on with their IBM PC-AT's in 1987? Minix? CP/M-86?
Hell if I know. There's a lot listed on the OS timeline on wikipedia, but you probably know as well or better than I do on that one... Good call on possibly inaccurate anecdotal evidence. I was thinking more on the OS/2 side - I've been reading a lot of discussions around here about how it had its finer points along with its weaknesses.
I rate profit as market share here. M$ doesn't need the money anymore, they need the visibility in the living room. The XBox was massively profitable on that rating if you consider it as a first-gen console from a producer
Massively harder to hack is due to the online interaction between Xbox and server. And (this is a guess here, but they wouldn't release this type of info until later [except for developers/ providers] anyways) DRM tech naturally thrown on the HD, along with more broadly integrated server / client checking. The XBox was originally produced when security was not as large an issue, and it was too late to implement high security later on. I am betting on that problem being fixed.
Misread a few articles, is my guess. I'd bet on a server touch to check for piracy in any game they sell though. Again, good call on BS, as well. I'm not as educated as I could be on the XBox, but I have read at least 75% of the articles posted on it here, along with 50% of the following commentary in them.
I was attempting to attribute some of the original Xbox's success to the ease of hacking out a way to get free games, and question whether the (to me) obvious modification to the second gen console to disable this particular feature would hurt its sales. Thus I was mentioning 'pay' on the software side. Xbox live? Meh. I still think it's going to be close to required.... The platinum maybe not.
And yet I didn't even bother buying it 'cause I could get free content without feeling slimy by installing linux and playing nethack.
And you've heard of the garden path, right?
No, that's not the freaking point. The point is that they're more pervasive in the market than you're presenting them as.
One of my good friends coaches a high school track team. He had kids skipping school to play Halo 2. These aren't hardcore gamers like I was. These are pretty normal kids. Sad commentary upon our culture aside, monopolies aren't instantly born, they're created by slowly seeping in until you're everywhere.
MS has had competitors in the past. Big, strong ones with better products or more recognition or a foot already in the door. But by moving slowly along the line in their own way, they somehow manage to dominate. Xbox was just the first step there, if they're successful. I'm hoping they're not, because they tend to depend upon market dominance accompanied by strong frontmen when they get to where they want to be. (which is an incredibly intelligent strategem - people love these things for some reason) But it's completely possible they will rule the living room like they rule the desktop in ten years....
Did I not say, "I don't own an Xbox?" I swear I did. I was a college student at the time and thirty bucks for a game was an incredible expenditure, like a week's food or more. And two hundred for an x-box? Well, I could afford it if I wanted, but I had better stuff to do. Instead I played with Linux for a while.
Please read the comment CAREFULLY next time before you blast someone. My problem with the Xbox2 is that from what I can tell it is going to be a highly restrictive entertainment environment wherein people are going to learn that information about them being collected is just fine and normal, owning less and less of the content of their entertainment is okay, and futzing around with and being interested in the stuff that runs their entertainment is bad. It's a move towards vegetabledom for the majority of its users.
Standard reply to all these 'Microsoft lost' replies I'm getting:
Microsoft counts market share as a profit. Always has, always will, and it's done them incredibly well.
Their goal in this case is to expand their general control of the desktop into control of the living room. The problem they have is that people have 1) a little more choice at home and 2) a lot less money, so they actually have to be more customer friendly and high quality while working to create cheaper product.
XBox was a 400$+ Million Loss Leader.
Anyone else know how to spell 'monopoly'?
Of course. The funny thing about the Xbox is that it's exactly like DOS was. When I first entered the computer industry, my 'mentor' told me, "The reason everyone used DOS was 'cause you could just copy it and pirate the thing all the time." I don't own an X-box, but the only reason I even CONSIDERED buying one was because if I did I could do what my friend did - rent five games and rip them all. Thus Microsoft profited when they sold him the Xbox, but all the game vendors and developers lost out.
Skip forward four or five years, and Xbox2 comes out. It's a lot harder to hack, (probably close to impossible) and, well, you're going to have to go online to play most games (and almost certainly all the Msoft games) from the specs, so uh... yeah. You have to pay. I hope Xbox2 falls flat on its face, but Microsoft has learned in the home entertainment game, just like they did in the PC game.
Isn't that neat?
What's REALLY funny about this is that it was a joke to start with - ha, ha, Windows == Used Car. But uh... Look at it now. Coughing, sputtering, rusted through on the bottom, suffering from all the sawdust in the engine. Topheavy. Looks to ME like Steve became what he hated. Anyone see "The Graduate"?
Why 'Except in Nebraska?' There's Steve-o, yelling like a used car salesman, but why couldn't he sell Windows in Nebraska? Some sort of consumer protection laws?
These are both 199$+. Doesn't fit the requirements.
Here I thought I was going to be able to make a, "I just reduced my UID size by 70%, and you can too if you send me your password" post.