I don't see any "supporting argument" in your post as to why you should believe in a free market.
Am I to assume that you are "[not] a deep thinker" who is making a "ridiculous statement"?
Most likely you just assume the free market is the holy provider of all goodness, global joy and fluffy kittens, because that's the overriding ethos (or propaganda? depending on how you look at it) espoused in the west.
All this rather ignores the fact that (a) the world quite patently isn't all joyful and full of fluffy kittens, and (b) even if it was, we quite patently DO NOT have a free market system in operation, anywhere!
Don't assume I'm bashing the free market and/or supporting market socialism. I wouldn't claim to know the best solution. But, I would say that it's an issue that requires "deep thinking", which you display none of, only unquestioning acceptance of the "free market rules" line, which has never been backed up with decent supporting evidence by it's proponents.
Yeah, but what do you expect, this is slashdot, where the fact they haven't looked at a Microsoft OS since 8 years ago is no barrier to judging it (against the latest and greatest release of Disro-of-Choice).
Every single MS story comes with a wave of "hilarious" Blue Screen jokes despite the fact that XP has never given me, or anybody I know, a blue screen, in several years of heavy use (including as a DAW platform).
Re:A key to music is the familiar.
on
How Songs Get Popular
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Not quite.
The key to good music the balance between the familiar and the surprising.
What is the soloist doing when he attempts to "build"? Actually the ideal process hardly ever takes place--that is, it is hardly ever the case that a conscientious soloist plays a thinking solo for a hard-listening hearer--but when this does happen, the key process is memory. The soloist has to establish for the listener what the important POINT, the motif if you like, is, and then show as much as he can of what it is that he sees in that motif, extending the relationships of it to the basic while never giving the feeling that he has forgotten it. In other words, I believe that it should be a basic principle to use repetition, rather than variety--but not too much. The listener is constatnly making predictions; actual infinitesimal predictions as to whether the next event will be a repetition of something, or something different. The player is constantly either confimring or denying these predictions in the listener's mind. As nearly as we can tell (Kraehenbuehl at Yale and I), the listener must come out right about 50% of the time--if he is too successful in predicting, he will be bored; if he is too unsuccessful, he will give up and call the music "disoganized."
Thus if the player starts a repetitive pattern, the listener's attention drops away as soon as he has successfully predicted that it is going to continue. Then, if the thing keeps going, the attention curve comes back up, and the listener becomes interested in just how long the pattern is going to continue. Similarly, if the player never repeats anything, no matter how tremendous an imagnation he has, the listener will decide that the game is not worth playing, that he is not going to be able to make any predections right, and also stops litening. Too much difference is sameness: boring. Too much sameness is boring--but also different once in a while.
Seeing that it was used before you doesn't tell you anything useful about who the person was who did the editing
Well, except for the fact that (if they're registered) their nickname comes up as a hyperlink to their user page. Which typically has some bio info, perhaps links to their more detailed personal homepage, etc.
I realise that all this could be lies. I also realise that if they're not registered, this isn't available. But even with those provisos, it's still a damn site better than what is available when using a normal encyclopaedia, where you don't have a clue who wrote or edited what.
Also, even if their user page bio is lies or nonexistent, from their username you can also see a list of edits they performed on other articles, and 'diff' them too. Put it all together this is a pretty powerful method of getting a grip on what kind of agenda they might have. Again - leagues beyond what is available elsewhere.
Until the "wikipedia is bad for research" crowd recognise this, I can't take them seriously.
You have time to dig through page histories and whatnot? I'd rather just go consult a source I already trust.
Well then clearly you don't "have time" for proper research. No matter what the source you "already trust" is, you shouldn't just assume you can trust it this time, fully, automatically, without qualification. If you're doing actual academic research, you should be looking into it harder than that - which will take at least as long (or probably longer) as the extremely fast + easy method of hitting the history tab of a Wikipedia article, selecting two radio buttons, and then hitting compare.
Last time Apple/iTunes came up, I dared to suggest it wasn't factually accurate to say that iTunes is categorically, objectively and undeniably the Greatest Music UI Ever Made Or Ever Possible. I suggested that UI of music players surely falls under "a matter of opinion" - mentioning that I personally happened to prefer Winamp. Within moments I was -1 troll, with replies telling me I only held such "ridiculous" opinions because I hadn't yet discovered "the truth".
globat.com do what you say. The bandwidth quota in their packages is quoted per-month, but it's worked out per day - if you excess that day, you get the "bandwidth exceeded" page, but the site comes back next time it reaches 12:00PST. Overall their packages seems good value and I've had no real problems with them. Hope this helps.
I'm a heavy net user, fully tooled up with Firefox/Thunderbird/Bittorrent and all that good stuff, but I've never once felt any use for RSS. Never got RSS software, and if my existing software includes such features, I'm not aware of it because I've never looked for them.
I just don't see the point!
Yeah, there are websites and a few blogs I like to keep up to date with, but I don't find it particularly difficult to, uh, visit the website. Hell, I don't even have a bookmark for most of them! It's not such a challenge to type the first couple of letters of the URL, autocomplete, down-arrow, enter.
Not bashing the technology, I'm sure some people find it useful, just idly lending my support to your stance.
The real trick to this is the "four pour". With a certain standardized spout that they attach to bottles in most bars, you start pouring, count to four, and you're pretty close to the 1.5 ounce mark
I'm confused.
Don't you have "optics" in the USA?
Over here, the amount of alcohol you get isn't at the whim of the bartender. Spirit bottles are hung with optics which are of a standardised size (usually 35ml, IIRC, but it can vary -- regardless, the volume used in a particular establishment must be clearly advertised on a notice somewhere near the bar). The barman/barmaid simply pushes the glass against the optic; it discharges until it's empty; they remove the glass, now containing a standard measure; the optic refills ready for the next shot.
Relying on the bar staff to count to four sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. How fast do you count? If I'm paying a given, standard amount of money for a shot, I want to know I'm getting my money's worth, not a smaller volume! Of course, this means you can't get a larger volume, too, but hey...
I'm in Britain; I don't have MSN; I do have AIM; loads of my friends have AIM and only a couple have MSN.
Obviously my anecdotal evidence is no stronger than yours, but, I'm just saying...
To be honest it's not always geographically based either. The reason I have AIM (and most of my friends have AIM) is because it seems the standard within the drum'n'bass community: if you want to send tracks to label bosses and DJs, you need AIM, simple as. Whereas none of them have MSN really.
On the other hand, in psytrance, MSN seems more popular.
First: YOU might not communicate with anyone in China, but some people do, so blocking all email from there might not cause collateral damage to YOU, but the internet isnt all about you, is it? It'll cause collateral damage to somebody!
Second: the fact the spam came from the US is not "irrelevant". You will never stop spam by technological means, or by legal means. It's economically motivated, so the only way to attack it is by following the money. If American people are making money out of it - FOLLOW THE MONEY. If Americans can't make money out of spam, they won't send any - whether it's routed via China, New Zealand or Jupiter.
I have to say, your post is one of the stupidest I've ever seen.
Unless of course, you meant blocking all of YOUR incoming email from China, in which case, fair play - great idea - knock yourself out! But if you mean it for everyone - way to be a selfish, blinkered idiot.
How is "which music software I like" (repeat: ***I*** like) not a matter of opinion?!?
saying something is simply "a matter of opinion" is the way to avoid arguments, not find the truth.
If you really think there's an unarguable "truth" when it comes to preference in music software user interface, you're an even bigger retard than I thought.
You seem to be in the minority.
Hence, I'm obviously wrong, and my opinion is obviously worthless, and can be automatically discounted?
Nice logic.
By that argument, both Apple and Linux (being extreme minorities) are completely pointless and anybody who uses them can be ignored. What... No? You don't agree, all of a sudden? Strange.
If you're going to try to defend a position as seemingly absurd as "the WinXP approach is better", you can't shy away from providing actual examples, or you *are* a troll, sir.
I will admit the lack of examples was weak, but c'mon, it WAS christmas day;]
Anyway... let's see. What annoys me about iTunes...
- Navigate to an album. Double click to load a track. Wonder what else you might queue up next, so navigate to another album. Now - how do I get straight back to the album that's currently playing? How do I bring up id3 info for what's currently playing? Or how do I enqueue a song so it plays when the current one has finished, instead of it cutting the current one off and playing immediately? Also, with that last point, how do I do that from a file manager/browser window also?
Now, I'm not saying those things are impossible with iTunes. I'm sure an Apple expert will be able to fill me in. But, I have yet to figure out how to do it. And the curious thing, is that the Apple-rocks brigade nearly always justify that stance with the claim that Apple UIs are dead easy to figure out for complete computer n00bs. How come, then, that I've spent ages clicking around in iTunes and can't for the life of me accomplish these, which are all a doddle in winamp?
What other things... well. On Winamp/Windows, if I ever don't know how to do something, I can try right-clicking it, and 95% of the time, that'll give me some options. No such joy with OSX (no, it's not that I'm not using a one button mouse, I'm well aware OSX supports multiple buttons, it's that there are no right-click hooks).
I hate the way files without id3 tags become practically invisible in iTunes, even if their filename spells out what they are.
And above all - I hate the way iTunes cannibalises your mp3 collection into some idiotic/SYSTEM/username/music/012376anv82a/01231239na9dv9 .mp3 storage system. I personally like organising my music myself. In directories. With id3 tags and filenames providing a "dual/redundancy" of identification.
Strange, but I'm sure if I'd said "I don't like iTunes, because it forces you to do it Apple's way - I prefer using {insert 6 obscure KDE apps here} for my ripping, burning and listening needs, because I like doing it my way", I'd have gotten praise. I'd have had lots of people agreeing it's annoying to be forced into a "One True Music Collection" methodology, and it's nice to organise it yourself. But, because I dared to suggest I actually like the XP platform, with Winamp/Nero/CDEX, I'm a "troll".
P.S. I think that communism in Russia worked out better than the American free market ever did. This is not a troll, or flamebait, or funny -- this is my honest opinion. I'm sick of people acting like it is an unarguable truth that the free market is guaranteed always the best. It's a matter of opinion.
Bwahaha. Funny you should say that. You're obviously predicating this on the notion that everyone who reads it will agree it IS an unarguable fact that the American free market is the best system out there. ROFL. Well, not everyone on slashdot is a naive libertarian extremist. Hint: you don't have a "free market", you never have had, in fact nobody ever has had.
(And, no, I don't rate Russian communism above it, but I certainly rate moderate/progressive Scandinavian-style socialism above it.)
Or, to be more fair/accurate: that's a matter of opinion.
I personally think the iTunes interface is an absolute piece of shit, I hate it. I could list specific examples but it's Christmas day and I can't be bothered, given that an Apple fanboy will mod this to oblivion whether I give specific examples or not.
But, honestly, can we cut out this "Apple's interface is always teh best!!!" idiocy? To me, I actively dislike the Apple way of doing things, not just in iTunes, but throughout OSX, and vastly prefer the WinXP approach. This is not a troll, or flamebait, or funny- this is my honest opinion. I'm sick of people acting like it is an unarguable truth that Apple's interface and UI design is guaranteed always the best. It's a matter of opinion.
Damn right. Nearly all the spam I get is from the US. Weird, then, that slashdot is full of American's sneerily proposing the complete blacklist of China.
Now, you might say "oh but that spam is sent via Chinese zombies" - I don't care - that's irrelevant. What it's selling is from and for Americans; pharmaceuticals, remortaging, qualifications, you name it - it's all very obviously targetted at an American audience. I couldn't make use of any of it, even if I wanted to (which I obviously don't)! I mean, for fuck's sake, my email address ends in.co.uk, you think they'd get a clue...
The problem is implementation of Javascript/DOM. Every browser does this differently. Some in a broken way.
It's really not as bad these days as you might think. Pretty much everything supports getElementbyId() - only IE4 and similarly stone-age browsers don't, with a combined market share of less than 1%. So, frankly, leaving them out in the cold wouldn't be exactly tragic - and if you do want to extend legacy support to them it's a simple matter to check for the non-existence of that function, and add a 'wrapper' with the same name which uses document.all or document.layers to have the same effect.
That way your entire code is free of if-this-browser/else-this-browser crap: it all just uses the standard DOM, except for one tiny wrapper function at the very start of your code.
I have a few books on CSS but no one actually talks about what CSS can really actually do. It's largely a matter of hit/miss to see what CSS tags have any effect on which elements. While I like the concept, the level of documentation on CSS is beyond pathetic.
CSS books may be pathetic, but they're also redundant, because the level of CSS documentation on the web is truly awesome.
My band finances, records, produces, designs, and distributes our CDs ourselves. For our last CD, I engineered/produced three of the tracks, did all the artwork, and I project-managed the overall manufacture of it.
I can tell you that our initial run of 1000 CDs cost us about £1300 - I'm too lazy to look up the current conversion but I'm guessing this is more like $2000, not $200.
I'm with you in a purely idealistic sense. We've given away lots of our CDs. We've met hundreds of people at gigs who say "I don't want to buy your CD, I copied it off my mate" - and we don't berate them. We're just happy they've got a copy of our music. We encourage p2p trading of our stuff and, in iD software style, release our last-but-one CD as a free MP3/JPG download.
On the other hand, we don't break even on gigging alone. (That's break even in terms of "petrol for the van", never mind luxuries like accomodation - we always just crash on friends' floors, no hotels for us - or food - we always just have to buy our own from our own pocket.) Promoters pay a pittance for an unsigned act, and since there's 10 of us, transport costs are high, etc... Over the years we've subsidised the band by hundreds or thousands of pounds each as it is. If we didn't sell CDs at gigs, we'd be even deeper in debt, to the point that we probably wouldn't be able to continue at all.
So, nice idealism, but your figures are still way off:)
Completely agree: I never use Google maps, I stick with Multimap. No fancy Ajax interface, a smaller viewable map, and a lot more (offensive) adverts, may seem to make this a weird choice, but there's another point you didn't mention which swings it for me:
Google's projection simply f#&%ing sucks!
I can't stand it, it looks ridiculous and almost unrecognisable compared to both the world as I know it and other maps (OS, etc) that I've already seen.
Re:The ultimate contrarian answer to this question
on
What is Ruby on Rails?
·
· Score: 1
Business logic belongs in the tier you're most committed to
Unfortunately, that sentence ends in a preposition - BAD! You really need to rewrite it like this:
Business logic belongs in the tier to which you're most committed.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I to assume that you are "[not] a deep thinker" who is making a "ridiculous statement"?
Most likely you just assume the free market is the holy provider of all goodness, global joy and fluffy kittens, because that's the overriding ethos (or propaganda? depending on how you look at it) espoused in the west.
All this rather ignores the fact that (a) the world quite patently isn't all joyful and full of fluffy kittens, and (b) even if it was, we quite patently DO NOT have a free market system in operation, anywhere!
Don't assume I'm bashing the free market and/or supporting market socialism. I wouldn't claim to know the best solution. But, I would say that it's an issue that requires "deep thinking", which you display none of, only unquestioning acceptance of the "free market rules" line, which has never been backed up with decent supporting evidence by it's proponents.
Every single MS story comes with a wave of "hilarious" Blue Screen jokes despite the fact that XP has never given me, or anybody I know, a blue screen, in several years of heavy use (including as a DAW platform).
The key to good music the balance between the familiar and the surprising.
I wish there was such thing as +6 insightful.
Well, except for the fact that (if they're registered) their nickname comes up as a hyperlink to their user page. Which typically has some bio info, perhaps links to their more detailed personal homepage, etc.
I realise that all this could be lies. I also realise that if they're not registered, this isn't available. But even with those provisos, it's still a damn site better than what is available when using a normal encyclopaedia, where you don't have a clue who wrote or edited what.
Also, even if their user page bio is lies or nonexistent, from their username you can also see a list of edits they performed on other articles, and 'diff' them too. Put it all together this is a pretty powerful method of getting a grip on what kind of agenda they might have. Again - leagues beyond what is available elsewhere.
Until the "wikipedia is bad for research" crowd recognise this, I can't take them seriously.
Well then clearly you don't "have time" for proper research. No matter what the source you "already trust" is, you shouldn't just assume you can trust it this time, fully, automatically, without qualification. If you're doing actual academic research, you should be looking into it harder than that - which will take at least as long (or probably longer) as the extremely fast + easy method of hitting the history tab of a Wikipedia article, selecting two radio buttons, and then hitting compare.
For all you know his Windows box is completely offline so patching isn't really an issue.
Slashdot's classic - when it's Linux, long uptime is proof of stability. When it's Windows, long uptime is proof of inadequate maintenance.
Last time Apple/iTunes came up, I dared to suggest it wasn't factually accurate to say that iTunes is categorically, objectively and undeniably the Greatest Music UI Ever Made Or Ever Possible. I suggested that UI of music players surely falls under "a matter of opinion" - mentioning that I personally happened to prefer Winamp. Within moments I was -1 troll, with replies telling me I only held such "ridiculous" opinions because I hadn't yet discovered "the truth".
Absolutely hilarious.
globat.com do what you say. The bandwidth quota in their packages is quoted per-month, but it's worked out per day - if you excess that day, you get the "bandwidth exceeded" page, but the site comes back next time it reaches 12:00PST. Overall their packages seems good value and I've had no real problems with them. Hope this helps.
Er, dude, you forgot the links ;)
I'm a heavy net user, fully tooled up with Firefox/Thunderbird/Bittorrent and all that good stuff, but I've never once felt any use for RSS. Never got RSS software, and if my existing software includes such features, I'm not aware of it because I've never looked for them.
I just don't see the point!
Yeah, there are websites and a few blogs I like to keep up to date with, but I don't find it particularly difficult to, uh, visit the website. Hell, I don't even have a bookmark for most of them! It's not such a challenge to type the first couple of letters of the URL, autocomplete, down-arrow, enter.
Not bashing the technology, I'm sure some people find it useful, just idly lending my support to your stance.
I'm confused.
Don't you have "optics" in the USA?
Over here, the amount of alcohol you get isn't at the whim of the bartender. Spirit bottles are hung with optics which are of a standardised size (usually 35ml, IIRC, but it can vary -- regardless, the volume used in a particular establishment must be clearly advertised on a notice somewhere near the bar). The barman/barmaid simply pushes the glass against the optic; it discharges until it's empty; they remove the glass, now containing a standard measure; the optic refills ready for the next shot.
Relying on the bar staff to count to four sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. How fast do you count? If I'm paying a given, standard amount of money for a shot, I want to know I'm getting my money's worth, not a smaller volume! Of course, this means you can't get a larger volume, too, but hey...
I'm in Britain; I don't have MSN; I do have AIM; loads of my friends have AIM and only a couple have MSN.
Obviously my anecdotal evidence is no stronger than yours, but, I'm just saying...
To be honest it's not always geographically based either. The reason I have AIM (and most of my friends have AIM) is because it seems the standard within the drum'n'bass community: if you want to send tracks to label bosses and DJs, you need AIM, simple as. Whereas none of them have MSN really.
On the other hand, in psytrance, MSN seems more popular.
First: YOU might not communicate with anyone in China, but some people do, so blocking all email from there might not cause collateral damage to YOU, but the internet isnt all about you, is it? It'll cause collateral damage to somebody!
Second: the fact the spam came from the US is not "irrelevant". You will never stop spam by technological means, or by legal means. It's economically motivated, so the only way to attack it is by following the money. If American people are making money out of it - FOLLOW THE MONEY. If Americans can't make money out of spam, they won't send any - whether it's routed via China, New Zealand or Jupiter.
I have to say, your post is one of the stupidest I've ever seen.
Unless of course, you meant blocking all of YOUR incoming email from China, in which case, fair play - great idea - knock yourself out! But if you mean it for everyone - way to be a selfish, blinkered idiot.
How is "which music software I like" (repeat: ***I*** like) not a matter of opinion?!?
saying something is simply "a matter of opinion" is the way to avoid arguments, not find the truth.
If you really think there's an unarguable "truth" when it comes to preference in music software user interface, you're an even bigger retard than I thought.
You seem to be in the minority.
Hence, I'm obviously wrong, and my opinion is obviously worthless, and can be automatically discounted?
Nice logic.
By that argument, both Apple and Linux (being extreme minorities) are completely pointless and anybody who uses them can be ignored. What... No? You don't agree, all of a sudden? Strange.
If you're going to try to defend a position as seemingly absurd as "the WinXP approach is better", you can't shy away from providing actual examples, or you *are* a troll, sir.
I will admit the lack of examples was weak, but c'mon, it WAS christmas day ;]
Anyway... let's see. What annoys me about iTunes...
- Navigate to an album. Double click to load a track. Wonder what else you might queue up next, so navigate to another album. Now - how do I get straight back to the album that's currently playing? How do I bring up id3 info for what's currently playing? Or how do I enqueue a song so it plays when the current one has finished, instead of it cutting the current one off and playing immediately? Also, with that last point, how do I do that from a file manager/browser window also?
Now, I'm not saying those things are impossible with iTunes. I'm sure an Apple expert will be able to fill me in. But, I have yet to figure out how to do it. And the curious thing, is that the Apple-rocks brigade nearly always justify that stance with the claim that Apple UIs are dead easy to figure out for complete computer n00bs. How come, then, that I've spent ages clicking around in iTunes and can't for the life of me accomplish these, which are all a doddle in winamp?
What other things... well. On Winamp/Windows, if I ever don't know how to do something, I can try right-clicking it, and 95% of the time, that'll give me some options. No such joy with OSX (no, it's not that I'm not using a one button mouse, I'm well aware OSX supports multiple buttons, it's that there are no right-click hooks).
I hate the way files without id3 tags become practically invisible in iTunes, even if their filename spells out what they are.
And above all - I hate the way iTunes cannibalises your mp3 collection into some idiotic /SYSTEM/username/music/012376anv82a/01231239na9dv9 .mp3 storage system. I personally like organising my music myself. In directories. With id3 tags and filenames providing a "dual/redundancy" of identification.
Strange, but I'm sure if I'd said "I don't like iTunes, because it forces you to do it Apple's way - I prefer using {insert 6 obscure KDE apps here} for my ripping, burning and listening needs, because I like doing it my way", I'd have gotten praise. I'd have had lots of people agreeing it's annoying to be forced into a "One True Music Collection" methodology, and it's nice to organise it yourself. But, because I dared to suggest I actually like the XP platform, with Winamp/Nero/CDEX, I'm a "troll".
P.S. I think that communism in Russia worked out better than the American free market ever did. This is not a troll, or flamebait, or funny -- this is my honest opinion. I'm sick of people acting like it is an unarguable truth that the free market is guaranteed always the best. It's a matter of opinion.
Bwahaha. Funny you should say that. You're obviously predicating this on the notion that everyone who reads it will agree it IS an unarguable fact that the American free market is the best system out there. ROFL. Well, not everyone on slashdot is a naive libertarian extremist. Hint: you don't have a "free market", you never have had, in fact nobody ever has had.
(And, no, I don't rate Russian communism above it, but I certainly rate moderate/progressive Scandinavian-style socialism above it.)
Or, to be more fair/accurate: that's a matter of opinion.
I personally think the iTunes interface is an absolute piece of shit, I hate it. I could list specific examples but it's Christmas day and I can't be bothered, given that an Apple fanboy will mod this to oblivion whether I give specific examples or not.
But, honestly, can we cut out this "Apple's interface is always teh best!!!" idiocy? To me, I actively dislike the Apple way of doing things, not just in iTunes, but throughout OSX, and vastly prefer the WinXP approach. This is not a troll, or flamebait, or funny- this is my honest opinion. I'm sick of people acting like it is an unarguable truth that Apple's interface and UI design is guaranteed always the best. It's a matter of opinion.
Now, you might say "oh but that spam is sent via Chinese zombies" - I don't care - that's irrelevant. What it's selling is from and for Americans; pharmaceuticals, remortaging, qualifications, you name it - it's all very obviously targetted at an American audience. I couldn't make use of any of it, even if I wanted to (which I obviously don't)! I mean, for fuck's sake, my email address ends in .co.uk, you think they'd get a clue...
It's really not as bad these days as you might think. Pretty much everything supports getElementbyId() - only IE4 and similarly stone-age browsers don't, with a combined market share of less than 1%. So, frankly, leaving them out in the cold wouldn't be exactly tragic - and if you do want to extend legacy support to them it's a simple matter to check for the non-existence of that function, and add a 'wrapper' with the same name which uses document.all or document.layers to have the same effect.
That way your entire code is free of if-this-browser/else-this-browser crap: it all just uses the standard DOM, except for one tiny wrapper function at the very start of your code.
For an example of this technique see: http://javascript.internet.com/snippets/getelement byid.html
(I found a better version of this technique a few weeks ago, but I can't seem to find it now. You get the idea though.)
Overall though, I don't really like javascript at all, I must admit.
CSS books may be pathetic, but they're also redundant, because the level of CSS documentation on the web is truly awesome.
http://www.dezwozhere.com/links.html
I have yet to come across a CSS question that I couldn't answer within 3 clicks of this page. HTH.
LOL... You're not in a band, are you?
My band finances, records, produces, designs, and distributes our CDs ourselves. For our last CD, I engineered/produced three of the tracks, did all the artwork, and I project-managed the overall manufacture of it.
I can tell you that our initial run of 1000 CDs cost us about £1300 - I'm too lazy to look up the current conversion but I'm guessing this is more like $2000, not $200.
I'm with you in a purely idealistic sense. We've given away lots of our CDs. We've met hundreds of people at gigs who say "I don't want to buy your CD, I copied it off my mate" - and we don't berate them. We're just happy they've got a copy of our music. We encourage p2p trading of our stuff and, in iD software style, release our last-but-one CD as a free MP3/JPG download.
On the other hand, we don't break even on gigging alone. (That's break even in terms of "petrol for the van", never mind luxuries like accomodation - we always just crash on friends' floors, no hotels for us - or food - we always just have to buy our own from our own pocket.) Promoters pay a pittance for an unsigned act, and since there's 10 of us, transport costs are high, etc... Over the years we've subsidised the band by hundreds or thousands of pounds each as it is. If we didn't sell CDs at gigs, we'd be even deeper in debt, to the point that we probably wouldn't be able to continue at all.
So, nice idealism, but your figures are still way off :)
Google's projection simply f#&%ing sucks!
I can't stand it, it looks ridiculous and almost unrecognisable compared to both the world as I know it and other maps (OS, etc) that I've already seen.
Unfortunately, that sentence ends in a preposition - BAD! You really need to rewrite it like this:
Business logic belongs in the tier to which you're most committed.
At which point it becomes 11 words :(
(NB: joking ;] )
Funnily enough, I think that's the first think Zonk has said or done which I wholeheartedly applaud ;)
And I hope a terrorists gets in and blows up tons of people.
Because this part:
You want to destroy freedom, more than the terrorists.
Strikes me as pretty insightful, frankly.