I've heard Mme. Royal speak, and to be honest, I'm amazed she got as far as she did.
I'm no fan of Sarko or Bush, but come on people, was this really the best the opposition could do? The Socialists would have been better off kidnapping John Kerry.
He may be a stuffed shirt, but at least the guy knows how to comport himself in public, ferchrissakes. (Besides, I hear he speaks French.) Sego came across as a reactive banshee who would promise anything to get elected -- think of the evil spawn of Newt Gingrich and Hillary Clinton.
Ew. On second thought, don't. I need to take a shower after that one..
I beg to differ. When I was a wee lad (and allowed to stay up late), I remember watching a special (read: pilot) that Rob Reiner put together called "The TV Show" in the late 1970s (on ABC-TV I think). It was basically skits that parodied TV (much like "Robot Chicken", though horribly dated of course).
The skits included a telethon ("Stop Death During Our Lifetime!"), a commercial for the chemical company Proto-Chem (with CEO Tom Proto-Chem no less), a send-up of Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom (the prey of the intrepid crew that week was "the white collar worker"), and.. Spinal Tap.
I was too young to do any drugs, so I know I wasn't hallucinating. Anyone else see this too?
Because you're not paying to use it. Rather, you're urging the listener to support the bands, not the record company (or any other minion of the MAFIAA).
You don't think any significant percentage of CD sales goes to the artist, do you? Maybe enough to cover studio costs, but that's it. The bands would be better off with your direct contributions.
And let's distinguish between "listening to music" and "using product". The RIAA would love to have you think that music is like shaving cream (or as Jeff Tweedy put it, a loaf of bread): you consume music, and must be forced to buy it again once it has been "consumed" already. Obviously, that's not the case. You do have fair use rights (that these folks would love to have people in power ignore.. and they are succeeding at this, by the way, but I digress as usual).
Does music count as "product"? I hope not, on many levels. First, it means that art in our society has no value beyond a market price -- that's pretty sad. Second, music can't really be sold this way anymore, now that the RIAA no longer has an exclusive lock on the only distribution network available. If it weren't for the costs of promotion activity, no artist would soon "need" a record label to push "product".
Maybe it's time, once and for all, to tell the RIAA to lead (with a new business model) or get the hell out of the consumers' way.
5. Rip 5 copies of your favorite RIAA-produced CD (or song collection from various CDs)
6. Add a track with the following (more or less): "If you enjoy the music on this CD, please make it a point to compensate the artists, but not by buying the CD from which this track came." And add a small explanation for the boycott. Then: "Please make five copies of this CD and distribute randomly, including this track."
7. Place your 5 copies in random yet conspicuous places, with only the phrase "Take me to your CD player" on the front of the disc. Leave them on park benches, in restrooms, on buses, wherever.
Hear, hear! Think of this from a software developer's perspective:
"We would like you to take on this project, with this largely undefined goal. We don't know what the requirements for the goal are, but we think you can figure them out. Incidentally, we think we've anticipated every unknown, except of course for those things we don't know we don't know. And we want this done as cheaply and quickly as possible, but don't worry: everyone in the organization today is on your side. Your budget only needs to be $x, not $X as those (cough) 'experts' claim, since the project will start paying for itself in mid-schedule."
No developer with a brain would take a project presented like this, but the American public did.. and were willing to sacrifice some soldiers to try it.
The undefined goal, of course, is "victory". The oil from Iraq was supposed to pay for the war (just ask Richard Perle), hence the payoff line. And everyone in the organization should have been greeting us with sweets and flowers (thank you Mr. Chalabi). And there's a tip of the hat to Rumsfeld in there too..
Anderson is tired of the role, and has said so in the past
She most certainly does not need the money, and is free to take whatever projects she pleases
All other players (with the exception of Julianne Moore) probably do need the money. Especially since Duchovny's last flick was a slightly smaller bomb than the one dropped on Hiroshima
And besides, GA has been taking other, vastly different roles (e.g. "Last King of Scotland", "Bleak House") to avoid getting "Shatnerred"
Mad props to her if that's the case. The whole X-Files franchise has been sucked dry of any worth for years anyway.
It's possible, but very rare. Whenever a company is acquired, the acquirer's marketing department sets the tone from that point onward. If they're smart, they understand that they bought a certain level of brand equity, which is nothing more than the power of the acquired company's brands in the minds that make up the marketplace. They might also understand that this mysterious quantity is very hard to regain once it has been depleted. Assuming of course, that they care.
Take the acquisition of Rolling Rock Beer by Anheuser-Busch as an example. RR had a brand that capitalized on its niche quality: We're smaller, but better, and we cater to the more discriminating lager drinker. (Whether or not that's true is debatable, I know, but that's the idea.) Add a little mystery like the "33" on the bottle, and some word of mouth (the branding equivalent of gold bullion), and you have a successful product over time. Rolling Rock is then perceived as "cool".
So, A-B buys Rolling Rock. What do they do? They immediately try to sell it like Bud. Quirky but uninspired ads, flashy web site, increasing the scale of operations, closing the original brewery (now that hurts!), and so on. They figure hey, beer is beer, and we know how to sell it, right?
Wrong.
Most Rolling Rock drinkers by the stuff because IT ISN'T BUD, for starters. And the brand equity -- what marketing types christen that "cool" factor -- is being slowly but surely eroded.
So it's not clear how Anheuser will enhance the brand, to try to regain lost ground. Or maybe they're just out to eliminate a competitor, and shaft the consumer in the process by wiping out one more choice. But maintaining (let alone growing) brand equity is a marketing black art, and one that most larger companies stumble over once they acquire another operation.
Many previous posters have commented on the dangers and risks of frequent job-hopping, and all of them are valid. The sad thing is, these risks don't necessarily diminish when the job leaves you.
Somehow, I've managed to survive as a software engineer in data networking and telecomm equipment, even after the gigantic downturn of 2000-02. But it wasn't without pain. I was laid off in early 2002 (the company closed its Raleigh site to consolidate in NJ, and due to cost-of-living issues, I chose not to chase my job), contracted from 2003 to late 2004, landed a full-time permanent slot after that. Then that position (with a publicly-traded Silicon Valley company, filled with hubris, and no management sense) was yanked in mid-2006. (The company is in a death spiral today, so maybe they did us all a favor.) After 3 months out of work, I managed to land a contracting gig, then convert to full-time late last year.
Now, none of this was my fault; I had no say whatsoever in what happened. But during my latest round of interviews, employers would look at my resume and comment on the job-hopping. I could quickly explain it away, but I always had to explain it.
The moral of the story? Life can suck enough as it is, so don't make it any harder for yourself.
First, I applaud your understanding of how faith and science need not be mutually exclusive.
As for explaining the hostility towards evolution, or anything that contradicts a creationist viewpoint, try this: All of the attackers are stupid.
Think about it. They are proponents of a theology that equates blind faith and acceptance with freedom. In my book, mindless obedience hardly makes one free. Nonetheless, fundamentalist types actively discourage the questioning of one's environment and its causes, which is arguably the first characteristic of intelligence. And of course, anyone who disagrees is heretical.
It's just like Orwell's Oceania in "1984" [with my notes}:
"war [against the heathens] is peace [or ticket to heaven anyway], freedom is slavery [or perhaps, "slavery is freedom"], ignorance is strength [no explanation needed here]".
I live here, love it a lot, and can't think of anywhere else I'd want to live. But this place has changed quite a bit in the past 10 years, and not by just an infinite percentage increase in Stanley Cups.
The Tragedy of the Commons is starting to occur here, as the highways get wider, the traffic slower, and the big-box stores even more daunting. And Wake County just voted for a $930M bond issue to upgrade the school system. (I voted for it myself, since it was the cheapest option, but the growth implications are sobering to say the least.)
And oh the refugees from California and New Jersey are still streaming into this place.
So please do me and everyone else here a big favor. Post to Craigslist with the following subject line: "RALEIGH SUCKS". And believe it.
We don't necessarily want you here. Stay home. If you helped to mess up California irrevocably, made the Boswash strip uninhabitable, and won't even bother to fix Pittsburgh, we really have NO use for your kind around here. (There is a very good reason why the natives say "We don't care how you do it up north.")
As much as I'd like to see KJI push up the daisies, I'm afraid the options of all major players are limited.
Economic sanctions are the only real cards left worth playing, and they're still dicey. Let's assume they actually work. You have a number of scenarios to deal with afterward:
Military response from NK. Not likely, but it would devastate the South if it did happen. Seoul could cease to exist. Japan would probably be fired upon as well. And the global economy might not be able to endure the strain.
Kim Jong Il abdicates the throne, voluntarily or otherwise. This sounds pleasing, until you consider that you have no idea who will take power next.
Massive refugee issues. The international community can't even handle Darfur. How about (tens of?) millions of refugees streaming over the Chinese border? (Not exactly something the Chinese want to deal with before their big coming-out party in 2008 either.)
The best course of action is probably what China is pursuing today, however slyly. On one hand, they're ramping up pressure ever so slightly on NK. On the other, they're getting trained cadres in place to take over the administration of the failed state once it finally collapses.
This probably won't sit well with US neo-cons and others who want to see a democratic state in the North. Not bloody likely. Realpolitik wins this round.
So the best we can do right now is to buy time while turning up the heat on NK ever so slowly.
I've been a Raleigh resident for 14+ years, and I have to agree. Especially when comparing and contrasting with the Bay Area.
I have family in the Bay, and I'm amazed at the crap they put up with for luxuries like shelter. The same folks just bought a house in the heart of SF, and are subsequently in hock up to their eyeballs. But, they claim that they'd never move to Raleigh because they "have it all". (Thffpt. Be careful what you wish for.)
Also, I've worked for 2 companies with senior management in the Bay, and the arrogance out there is nothing short of apalling. I find most Valley residents, especially managers, to be nothing more than mindless stooges who are convinced that, because they have a zip code that begins with a 9, they're God's Gift to Software Management.
Nothing could in fact be further from the truth: I was let go from both companies because of the, um, interesting decisions these twits forced upon my local organization.
Granted, Raleigh is the kind of place that is described as "a nice place to raise a family". (Translation: the night-life easily fits on four city blocks.) And if you like the Bay, hey, more power to you; try to scratch out a living there. But I'm spoiled.. I have homeowner's equity now. And a decent hockey team.
Nice to see a "Glenngary Glenn Ross" ref. Mod parent up please! (And rent the movie already.)
Seriously, though: My younger brother was in sales for a while, and he claims that this
speech adequately reflects the attitude. Which is why he left that line of work forever.
Disclaimer: I'm over 35, so almost everything produced today looks like crap to me these days.
The biggest reason for the decline in cinema is not just the fact that studios like to turn profits. In fact, this isn't much of a reason at all: Most studios want to have a rate of return on an entire portfolio of flicks in pursuit of an average rate of return. Some of that portfolio will be riskier than other parts, so occasionally an interesting movie manages to get made. This is very much like the way a venture capitalist will throw money at a handful of start-ups, hoping that at least one or two will succeed wildly while the rest tank.
Unfortunately, it's almost impossible to forecast revenue, let alone income, from a movie project. (Remember the remake of "Godzilla"? It could have, would have, should have been a hit, but it was a huge disaster.) Oh sure, you can cut expenses to the bone, and try to innovate with cheaper-yet-edgier marketing, but there's no guarantee that a studio will ever get its money back. Of course, relying on tried and true tactics, including rehashed plots and reliable demographic groups (like teenagers in the summer) mitigate the risk -- but not entirely.
And how, do you ask, are projects evaluated since there's no hope for decent financial projections? Enter "the pitch", the fifteen-second description of the movie that executive producers give to studio heads. The pitch is often the sole basis for decision-making. Sure, there may be a script ready to go, but a quick blurb describing the plot ("it's like the Princess Bride, but with a twist..") and possibly some hints about the talent involved ("we lined up The Rock for the Princess Buttercup role") will go a lot farther to bankroll the project.
Now think about the kinds of pitches that are most successful, and you'll soon understand why sub-par films get funding while innovative ideas do not. So a director wants to be an artist, or a screenwriter wants to be the voice of his or her generation? Nobody cares: there are plenty of those cockroaches scurrying around LA looking for deals, and the fatter ones know how to play the game.
My advice? Avoid the recent offerings of big studios, and opt for independent film (since producers are encouraged to take risks) and older classics that were truly innovative for their time. We all know how the entertainment industry resists change, but you may as well try to force change upon them, in your own little way, with your dollars.
So if you drop a piece of buttered bread in this case, will it always fall buttered-side down, since your chances are proportional to the value of the Earth?
Or not, since that would be a good thing in this case?
Agreed. But on the other hand, XPS is just a bad idea countering another bad idea.
You would think, by now, that MSFT would understand the business case for open standards. It would be far more effective for MSFT to release the standard to XPS out in the wild, and never bother to enforce any patents etc. if the open source community or other vendors embraced it. PDF gets some serious competition (the merits/drawbacks of XPS notwithstanding), MSFT can safely remove PDF generation from Vista (and thumb its nose at Warnock and Co.), and Vista could bundle some slick XPS-generation tools (that, oh by the way, MSFT had waiting for such an emergency).
In short, this could have been a perfect opportunity for MSFT to win on every front of this particular battle.
But I guess that would be too simple. Methinks MSFT believes a more exciting business plan involves giving the U.S. DoJ more reason to sniff around while pissing off customers.
We are pleased to announce that we have fulfilled your latest request: to make Sony "the next Apple". Although we had to steal resources from projects in our Monkey's Paw Department, we have managed to complete this task up to your specifications.
We hope you enjoy the restructuring. Sony now resembles Apple, circa 1996.
Valid points. But I think we're missing the point behind the whole YHF phenomenon.
Jeff Tweedy and co. proved that the Internet is a viable means for legally distributing music, and that bands don't need record labels as much as they used to. You better believe that this didn't escape Steve Jobs' attention.
This isn't to say that record labels are dying. But even today the industry is not coping well with this alternative distribution channel (tired of hearing "Piracy!" yet?).
There are plenty of magazine articles and books on the whole Wilco story, but I'm still waiting for Harvard Business Review to pick up on it, and the forced transformation of an entire industry as a result.
And if you want to be really paranoid, the "minority stakeholder" is in fact the People's Liberation Army.
Y'see, the PLA, unlike the armed forces of every other country on the planet, doesn't get its funding from the central government. They have their own business ventures, be it a stake in Lenovo or agricultural exports produced with slave labor. (Oops, I mean "re-education camps", silly me.)
If you want to know why this is so, read up on the Cultural Revolution, and how it almost tore China apart. Had the PLA not stepped in, China could have devolved into civil war yet again. The top general staff of the PLA obviously has every interest in maintaining control, so they would rather manage their own purse strings. It beats relying on the caprice of the leader of the People's Central Committee.
Getting back to the original question: Is it possible that some "extra" circuitry is in every Lenovo laptop? Certainly. Is it likely? I don't think so. (One thing to consider is how the U.S. Government is buying these laptops. We're addicted to deficit spending, and selling bonds to the China's central bank.)
Should every Lenovo laptop be inspected before use in government offices, just in case some enterprising intelligence officer in the PLA is really that stupid?
Umm.... can't hurt.
How about karma as a combustion catalyst?
on
"H-Prize" Announced
·
· Score: 1
As many others have noted, hydrogen is not a source of energy, but a carrier.
And wouldn't you know it, while pursuing my MBA, I
co-wrote a paper about this very problem.
Pardon me as a burn some karma for some shamless self-promotion. Feel free to poke around at The Center for Sustainable Enterprise at UNC's Kenan-Flagler Business School while you're at it.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard Mme. Royal speak, and to be honest, I'm amazed she got as far as she did.
I'm no fan of Sarko or Bush, but come on people, was this really the best the opposition could do? The Socialists would have been better off kidnapping John Kerry.
He may be a stuffed shirt, but at least the guy knows how to comport himself in public, ferchrissakes. (Besides, I hear he speaks French.) Sego came across as a reactive banshee who would promise anything to get elected -- think of the evil spawn of Newt Gingrich and Hillary Clinton.
Ew. On second thought, don't. I need to take a shower after that one..
Spinal Tap did not exist before the movie.
I beg to differ. When I was a wee lad (and allowed to stay up late), I remember watching a special (read: pilot) that Rob Reiner put together called "The TV Show" in the late 1970s (on ABC-TV I think). It was basically skits that parodied TV (much like "Robot Chicken", though horribly dated of course).
The skits included a telethon ("Stop Death During Our Lifetime!"), a commercial for the chemical company Proto-Chem (with CEO Tom Proto-Chem no less), a send-up of Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom (the prey of the intrepid crew that week was "the white collar worker"), and.. Spinal Tap.
I was too young to do any drugs, so I know I wasn't hallucinating. Anyone else see this too?
Because you're not paying to use it. Rather, you're urging the listener to support the bands, not the record company (or any other minion of the MAFIAA).
You don't think any significant percentage of CD sales goes to the artist, do you? Maybe enough to cover studio costs, but that's it. The bands would be better off with your direct contributions.
And let's distinguish between "listening to music" and "using product". The RIAA would love to have you think that music is like shaving cream (or as Jeff Tweedy put it, a loaf of bread): you consume music, and must be forced to buy it again once it has been "consumed" already. Obviously, that's not the case. You do have fair use rights (that these folks would love to have people in power ignore.. and they are succeeding at this, by the way, but I digress as usual).
Does music count as "product"? I hope not, on many levels. First, it means that art in our society has no value beyond a market price -- that's pretty sad. Second, music can't really be sold this way anymore, now that the RIAA no longer has an exclusive lock on the only distribution network available. If it weren't for the costs of promotion activity, no artist would soon "need" a record label to push "product".
Maybe it's time, once and for all, to tell the RIAA to lead (with a new business model) or get the hell out of the consumers' way.
5. Rip 5 copies of your favorite RIAA-produced CD (or song collection from various CDs)
6. Add a track with the following (more or less): "If you enjoy the music on this CD, please make it a point to compensate the artists, but not by buying the CD from which this track came." And add a small explanation for the boycott. Then: "Please make five copies of this CD and distribute randomly, including this track."
7. Place your 5 copies in random yet conspicuous places, with only the phrase "Take me to your CD player" on the front of the disc. Leave them on park benches, in restrooms, on buses, wherever.
Hey everybody, PaRtY at my place!!!!!!!!!1
Oh, wait..
Hear, hear! Think of this from a software developer's perspective:
"We would like you to take on this project, with this largely undefined goal. We don't know what the requirements for the goal are, but we think you can figure them out. Incidentally, we think we've anticipated every unknown, except of course for those things we don't know we don't know. And we want this done as cheaply and quickly as possible, but don't worry: everyone in the organization today is on your side. Your budget only needs to be $x, not $X as those (cough) 'experts' claim, since the project will start paying for itself in mid-schedule."
No developer with a brain would take a project presented like this, but the American public did.. and were willing to sacrifice some soldiers to try it.
The undefined goal, of course, is "victory". The oil from Iraq was supposed to pay for the war (just ask Richard Perle), hence the payoff line. And everyone in the organization should have been greeting us with sweets and flowers (thank you Mr. Chalabi). And there's a tip of the hat to Rumsfeld in there too..
For a few simple reasons:
Mad props to her if that's the case. The whole X-Files franchise has been sucked dry of any worth for years anyway.
It's possible, but very rare. Whenever a company is acquired, the acquirer's marketing department sets the tone from that point onward. If they're smart, they understand that they bought a certain level of brand equity, which is nothing more than the power of the acquired company's brands in the minds that make up the marketplace. They might also understand that this mysterious quantity is very hard to regain once it has been depleted. Assuming of course, that they care.
Take the acquisition of Rolling Rock Beer by Anheuser-Busch as an example. RR had a brand that capitalized on its niche quality: We're smaller, but better, and we cater to the more discriminating lager drinker. (Whether or not that's true is debatable, I know, but that's the idea.) Add a little mystery like the "33" on the bottle, and some word of mouth (the branding equivalent of gold bullion), and you have a successful product over time. Rolling Rock is then perceived as "cool".
So, A-B buys Rolling Rock. What do they do? They immediately try to sell it like Bud. Quirky but uninspired ads, flashy web site, increasing the scale of operations, closing the original brewery (now that hurts!), and so on. They figure hey, beer is beer, and we know how to sell it, right?
Wrong.
Most Rolling Rock drinkers by the stuff because IT ISN'T BUD, for starters. And the brand equity -- what marketing types christen that "cool" factor -- is being slowly but surely eroded.
So it's not clear how Anheuser will enhance the brand, to try to regain lost ground. Or maybe they're just out to eliminate a competitor, and shaft the consumer in the process by wiping out one more choice. But maintaining (let alone growing) brand equity is a marketing black art, and one that most larger companies stumble over once they acquire another operation.
Many previous posters have commented on the dangers and risks of frequent job-hopping, and all of them are valid. The sad thing is, these risks don't necessarily diminish when the job leaves you.
Somehow, I've managed to survive as a software engineer in data networking and telecomm equipment, even after the gigantic downturn of 2000-02. But it wasn't without pain. I was laid off in early 2002 (the company closed its Raleigh site to consolidate in NJ, and due to cost-of-living issues, I chose not to chase my job), contracted from 2003 to late 2004, landed a full-time permanent slot after that. Then that position (with a publicly-traded Silicon Valley company, filled with hubris, and no management sense) was yanked in mid-2006. (The company is in a death spiral today, so maybe they did us all a favor.) After 3 months out of work, I managed to land a contracting gig, then convert to full-time late last year.
Now, none of this was my fault; I had no say whatsoever in what happened. But during my latest round of interviews, employers would look at my resume and comment on the job-hopping. I could quickly explain it away, but I always had to explain it.
The moral of the story? Life can suck enough as it is, so don't make it any harder for yourself.
First, I applaud your understanding of how faith and science need not be mutually exclusive.
As for explaining the hostility towards evolution, or anything that contradicts a creationist viewpoint, try this: All of the attackers are stupid.
Think about it. They are proponents of a theology that equates blind faith and acceptance with freedom. In my book, mindless obedience hardly makes one free. Nonetheless, fundamentalist types actively discourage the questioning of one's environment and its causes, which is arguably the first characteristic of intelligence. And of course, anyone who disagrees is heretical.
It's just like Orwell's Oceania in "1984" [with my notes}:
"war [against the heathens] is peace [or ticket to heaven anyway], freedom is slavery [or perhaps, "slavery is freedom"], ignorance is strength [no explanation needed here]".
Nobody with a working brain believes that.
Do they?
I live here, love it a lot, and can't think of anywhere else I'd want to live. But this place has changed quite a bit in the past 10 years, and not by just an infinite percentage increase in Stanley Cups.
The Tragedy of the Commons is starting to occur here, as the highways get wider, the traffic slower, and the big-box stores even more daunting. And Wake County just voted for a $930M bond issue to upgrade the school system. (I voted for it myself, since it was the cheapest option, but the growth implications are sobering to say the least.)
And oh the refugees from California and New Jersey are still streaming into this place.
So please do me and everyone else here a big favor. Post to Craigslist with the following subject line: "RALEIGH SUCKS". And believe it.
We don't necessarily want you here. Stay home. If you helped to mess up California irrevocably, made the Boswash strip uninhabitable, and won't even bother to fix Pittsburgh, we really have NO use for your kind around here. (There is a very good reason why the natives say "We don't care how you do it up north.")
I'll bet the outhouse is real big.
As much as I'd like to see KJI push up the daisies, I'm afraid the options of all major players are limited.
Economic sanctions are the only real cards left worth playing, and they're still dicey. Let's assume they actually work. You have a number of scenarios to deal with afterward:
The best course of action is probably what China is pursuing today, however slyly. On one hand, they're ramping up pressure ever so slightly on NK. On the other, they're getting trained cadres in place to take over the administration of the failed state once it finally collapses.
This probably won't sit well with US neo-cons and others who want to see a democratic state in the North. Not bloody likely. Realpolitik wins this round.
So the best we can do right now is to buy time while turning up the heat on NK ever so slowly.
I've been a Raleigh resident for 14+ years, and I have to agree. Especially when comparing and contrasting with the Bay Area.
I have family in the Bay, and I'm amazed at the crap they put up with for luxuries like shelter. The same folks just bought a house in the heart of SF, and are subsequently in hock up to their eyeballs. But, they claim that they'd never move to Raleigh because they "have it all". (Thffpt. Be careful what you wish for.)
Also, I've worked for 2 companies with senior management in the Bay, and the arrogance out there is nothing short of apalling. I find most Valley residents, especially managers, to be nothing more than mindless stooges who are convinced that, because they have a zip code that begins with a 9, they're God's Gift to Software Management.
Nothing could in fact be further from the truth: I was let go from both companies because of the, um, interesting decisions these twits forced upon my local organization.
Granted, Raleigh is the kind of place that is described as "a nice place to raise a family". (Translation: the night-life easily fits on four city blocks.) And if you like the Bay, hey, more power to you; try to scratch out a living there. But I'm spoiled.. I have homeowner's equity now. And a decent hockey team.
To put the lunacy of NK in perspective, consider that:
Agreed. Apple is an offender, but not the worst offender by a long shot.
Arguably, their use of DRM was to placate the RIAA enough to allow iTMS to happen. Compare and contrast with Microsoft and Sony.
Oh well. Nice idea, dumb execution.
Nice to see a "Glenngary Glenn Ross" ref. Mod parent up please! (And rent the movie already.)
Seriously, though: My younger brother was in sales for a while, and he claims that this speech adequately reflects the attitude. Which is why he left that line of work forever.
Disclaimer: I'm over 35, so almost everything produced today looks like crap to me these days.
The biggest reason for the decline in cinema is not just the fact that studios like to turn profits. In fact, this isn't much of a reason at all: Most studios want to have a rate of return on an entire portfolio of flicks in pursuit of an average rate of return. Some of that portfolio will be riskier than other parts, so occasionally an interesting movie manages to get made. This is very much like the way a venture capitalist will throw money at a handful of start-ups, hoping that at least one or two will succeed wildly while the rest tank.
Unfortunately, it's almost impossible to forecast revenue, let alone income, from a movie project. (Remember the remake of "Godzilla"? It could have, would have, should have been a hit, but it was a huge disaster.) Oh sure, you can cut expenses to the bone, and try to innovate with cheaper-yet-edgier marketing, but there's no guarantee that a studio will ever get its money back. Of course, relying on tried and true tactics, including rehashed plots and reliable demographic groups (like teenagers in the summer) mitigate the risk -- but not entirely.
And how, do you ask, are projects evaluated since there's no hope for decent financial projections? Enter "the pitch", the fifteen-second description of the movie that executive producers give to studio heads. The pitch is often the sole basis for decision-making. Sure, there may be a script ready to go, but a quick blurb describing the plot ("it's like the Princess Bride, but with a twist..") and possibly some hints about the talent involved ("we lined up The Rock for the Princess Buttercup role") will go a lot farther to bankroll the project.
Now think about the kinds of pitches that are most successful, and you'll soon understand why sub-par films get funding while innovative ideas do not. So a director wants to be an artist, or a screenwriter wants to be the voice of his or her generation? Nobody cares: there are plenty of those cockroaches scurrying around LA looking for deals, and the fatter ones know how to play the game.
My advice? Avoid the recent offerings of big studios, and opt for independent film (since producers are encouraged to take risks) and older classics that were truly innovative for their time. We all know how the entertainment industry resists change, but you may as well try to force change upon them, in your own little way, with your dollars.
So if you drop a piece of buttered bread in this case, will it always fall buttered-side down, since your chances are proportional to the value of the Earth?
Or not, since that would be a good thing in this case?
Or do you need to stand on a carpet to do this?
Must go. My head a-splode.
Agreed. But on the other hand, XPS is just a bad idea countering another bad idea.
You would think, by now, that MSFT would understand the business case for open standards. It would be far more effective for MSFT to release the standard to XPS out in the wild, and never bother to enforce any patents etc. if the open source community or other vendors embraced it. PDF gets some serious competition (the merits/drawbacks of XPS notwithstanding), MSFT can safely remove PDF generation from Vista (and thumb its nose at Warnock and Co.), and Vista could bundle some slick XPS-generation tools (that, oh by the way, MSFT had waiting for such an emergency).
In short, this could have been a perfect opportunity for MSFT to win on every front of this particular battle.
But I guess that would be too simple. Methinks MSFT believes a more exciting business plan involves giving the U.S. DoJ more reason to sniff around while pissing off customers.
To: Howard Stringer, CEO, Sony Corporation
From: Djinns'R'Us, Wish Granting Department
Re: Recent requests after bottle opening
Dear Mr. Stringer,
We are pleased to announce that we have fulfilled your latest request: to make Sony "the next Apple". Although we had to steal resources from projects in our Monkey's Paw Department, we have managed to complete this task up to your specifications.
We hope you enjoy the restructuring. Sony now resembles Apple, circa 1996.
Sincerely,
Valid points. But I think we're missing the point behind the whole YHF phenomenon.
Jeff Tweedy and co. proved that the Internet is a viable means for legally distributing music, and that bands don't need record labels as much as they used to. You better believe that this didn't escape Steve Jobs' attention.
This isn't to say that record labels are dying. But even today the industry is not coping well with this alternative distribution channel (tired of hearing "Piracy!" yet?).
There are plenty of magazine articles and books on the whole Wilco story, but I'm still waiting for Harvard Business Review to pick up on it, and the forced transformation of an entire industry as a result.
And if you want to be really paranoid, the "minority stakeholder" is in fact the People's Liberation Army.
Y'see, the PLA, unlike the armed forces of every other country on the planet, doesn't get its funding from the central government. They have their own business ventures, be it a stake in Lenovo or agricultural exports produced with slave labor. (Oops, I mean "re-education camps", silly me.)
If you want to know why this is so, read up on the Cultural Revolution, and how it almost tore China apart. Had the PLA not stepped in, China could have devolved into civil war yet again. The top general staff of the PLA obviously has every interest in maintaining control, so they would rather manage their own purse strings. It beats relying on the caprice of the leader of the People's Central Committee.
Getting back to the original question: Is it possible that some "extra" circuitry is in every Lenovo laptop? Certainly. Is it likely? I don't think so. (One thing to consider is how the U.S. Government is buying these laptops. We're addicted to deficit spending, and selling bonds to the China's central bank.)
Should every Lenovo laptop be inspected before use in government offices, just in case some enterprising intelligence officer in the PLA is really that stupid?
Umm.... can't hurt.
As many others have noted, hydrogen is not a source of energy, but a carrier.
And wouldn't you know it, while pursuing my MBA, I co-wrote a paper about this very problem.
Pardon me as a burn some karma for some shamless self-promotion. Feel free to poke around at The Center for Sustainable Enterprise at UNC's Kenan-Flagler Business School while you're at it.
This cancer gene could be the one that also gives humans a soul.
Hmm, lessee.. no cancer in my lifetime in exchange for something I've never had any use for. Man, hard choice.
Ch-ching!
Next week, maybe I'll get to trade group sex for herpes.