I don't think it would matter. If you sign up for the 'Do-not-call' list you probably don't buy anything from a telemarketer in the first place. If a company moves to another country and calls the people on the list, they are just wasting their time and money. I'm on the list, so if I get a call from a telemarketer after Oct 1st, I'm just going to be pissed off, and not going to care what they are selling. I feel bad for people that DON'T sign up for the list, as they will probably get hammered by calls.
Hmm....I wonder why MS would do a bunch of nice things, like going after spammers, that makes them look like a nice company? The kind that can be trusted?
This is the calm before the DRM storm hits
Back on topic: I'd root for Amazon over MS. Granted amazon has tried to patent everything under the sun, but at least they know you have to give the customer what they want.
For any project, if you look at communications costs, hardware costs, personnel costs, all that, software licensing ranges -- the highest you'd ever find is, like, 3% of any IT-type project.
I don't know where he got those figures from, but 3% doesn't seem accurate. Those personnel, communications, and hardware costs are often unavoidable fixed costs. If you need a T-1 line between offices, that isn't going to change depending on what OS you are running. Why didn't he just go ahead and toss in the rest of the fixed costs?
"Gee, Linux isn't a lot cheaper over Windows Server if we factor in the cost of the building into the project."
most are saved by extensive use of special effects
And where do you think those brave CGI animators, and the courageous software engineers that support them, would have gotten their experience from? From tinkering with a hacked Xbox of course...
Re:Why the XBox is bad for Microsoft
on
Hacking the XBox
·
· Score: 1
Actually, if you look at a lot of the most popular games for the Xbox, there isn't an awful lot of overlap between the console and the PC. Granted, there are some games like Splinter Cell that appeared on both around the same time, but a lot of RTS and RPGs never make it to the console, and many racing and fighting games never make it to the PC. To get your total gaming fix, you will need both a console and a PC. (The question is if the console is the PS2 or Xbox, but that is a whole other thread). With Microsoft having a stake in some game developers, you can be pretty confident it'll stay that way too.
Also if you look at any of the information out there about the Xbox2, even if only half of it is true, there will be a closer relationship between the console and a Windows PC. Streaming Windows Media files is one thing I've heard frequently, which would be motivation for the average user to keep Windows on their PC.
You also have to remember it may not be the 'RIAA' that gives that $20K. Sony could give $20K, AOLTW $15K, Disney $20k, etc... And they can also give money in other ways, such as foundations or organizations that the politican could be part of. Think about how much trouble Clinton got into over large donations to his library.
how come the bad guys are smart enough to heavily influence politics with their money but the good guys aren't?
Because people keep giving the 'bad' guys money. Have you bought a CD/DVD, gone to see a movie, or bought a book? You've just given money to the 'bad' guys. If you want the EFF to buy off a congressman, send them a $20 check instead of buying a CD. I don't have the figures, but I feel pretty confident that the EFF didn't bring in as much as AOL/TW last year.
If Kazaa plans on making money from using other people's bandwidth, isn't that going to be in violation of some ISP's service agreements? I know my ISP prohibts "commercial" use, so if I share files and for which I am paid in some form, wouldn't that in violation of that agreement?
Granted, they don't seem to mind p2p right now unless they get a notice from the RIAA/MPAA, but if Kazaa goes legit I could see them demanding a piece of the pie too.
It is probably just an attempt to make the RIAA/MPAA look like the bad guys because they don't want to work with a p2p company. Then they can go to Congress, the courts, etc, and say they made a good-faith effort to get artists compensated. Could be the start of a legal defense using anti-trust laws if the RIAA/MPAA only work with some companies and not others.
Grocery workers like cashiers are unionized. I doubt Kroger's would be able to fire all their cashiers in one region, and not expect a backlash.
During the day, the local grocery store has one person standing watch over the self-check lines. The human element will probably never go completely away, but the trend is to more automation, and that is true in just about every industry that employees low-wage labor.
If Wal-Mart goes to the trouble to set up a database of the serial numbers of every product you buy, and then develops the infrastructure necessary to send that information to any Wal-Mart every time you happen to walk in, they certainly WON'T share that information with, let's say, Target. It would be to Wal-Mart advantage to be the only one that knows your preferrences, and which products you are most price senstitive towards. It's the same reason a Kroger Plus card won't work at Big Bear.
You have to keep in mind that you are dealing with people that see everyting in terms of absolutes. Be it in the form of religion, where you are told by God Himself what is right, or by greed, where whatever you do to make another dollar is right.
RIAA - Anything they can do to keep control of the means of distribution is right, regardless of how those actions appear to others. If that requires scare tactics against their customers, so be it. Anything that in the short term reduces profits or control is wrong. Due process? It's too expensive to go before a judge, so side-step it with the DMCA.
While there are individuals in the music industry that will see problems in the RIAA's stance, they tend to get buried under the groupthink for the time being. At some point hopefully those that see the shades of gray will take leadership positions, but until then it is just black and white.
Ashcroft et al - Anything that could make America more secure is right, even if it goes against the very things that America what is. No abstact notions of 'the greater good' or the 'american ideal' just pure black hats vs. white hats.
Corporations and governments tend not to see things in shades of gray. Why concern yourself with abstract notions of right or wrong in a boardroom or committee meeting, when you use money or power to influence what IS right or wrong?
There was also a piece on 20/20 a few months or so that was pretty pro-file-sharing. John Stossel for it, Barbara Walters was against (Barb you ignorant slut!).
There was also a newsweek or time article (I get both, and can't remember which it was in) about DRM. Even had a nice graphic of a pair of hands handcuffed in front a computer screen.
That kind of press will reach a lot of people that would never have cared about the DMCA before, or figured it wouldn't apply to anything they do. Hopefully that will draw more people over the 'free-speech' side, as posting anti-RIAA comments on/. is like preaching to the choir.
It is probably the same situation companies like Sony find themselves in with regards to tech organizations and the RIAA. If you diverify, you can wind up being a member in an organization that winds up opposing actions by another organization you are in. A house divided against itself if you will.
IBM has to walk a thin line between pushing open source (in the form of Linux) to weaken its competitors, and hold back open source where it could damage their money-making proprietary systems.
Granted this is most likely just a case where IBM wasn't fully aware beforehand, but I would expect to see situations like this more often in the future.
Eh it is a combination of rooting for the underdog, and picking the lesser of two evils. If the situation was reversed and Apple had the overwhelming majority of the market, people would be crying foul over iTunes' DRM and their tying of software and hardware together.
As it is, Apple is less of a threat than MS is thought to be, so they must be 'good.'
And a law like this is ripe for abuse. Wouldn't it cover just about any copywrited material? What about photos? Could the AP cripple someone's computer because a.jpg of a copyrighted image in someone's browser cache?
What about intent? If someone emails me a low-quality MP3 of a copyrighted song, does that give the RIAA permission to cripple my computer because I'm a pirate? What if I wasn't the one that downloaded the song, and it was my neighbour's kid that downloaded a song on my son's computer when I wasn't around? In a court of law, intent plays a part when a person is charged with theft, how could it not in this case?
This basically amounts to sub-contracting work out from the Judicial system. As soon as you start subbing out work, it starts going to the lowest bidder. Eventually all court proceedings will be carried out over videoconferrencing with a guy in India.
An equally large, and relevant, problem is the lawsuit culture present in the US. The reason everyone is trying to patent every possible idea no matter how abstract is that it our legal system tolerates lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. Instead of providing relief for a party that has been wronged, it has become a lottery, where the price a patent application could win you a big cash settlement.
Now I believe that the current patent system is badly broken and in need of a massive overhaul, but how much of the change should be made in the patent system, and how much in the courts?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it would matter. If you sign up for the 'Do-not-call' list you probably don't buy anything from a telemarketer in the first place. If a company moves to another country and calls the people on the list, they are just wasting their time and money. I'm on the list, so if I get a call from a telemarketer after Oct 1st, I'm just going to be pissed off, and not going to care what they are selling. I feel bad for people that DON'T sign up for the list, as they will probably get hammered by calls.
Hmm....I wonder why MS would do a bunch of nice things, like going after spammers, that makes them look like a nice company? The kind that can be trusted?
This is the calm before the DRM storm hits
Back on topic: I'd root for Amazon over MS. Granted amazon has tried to patent everything under the sun, but at least they know you have to give the customer what they want.
For any project, if you look at communications costs, hardware costs, personnel costs, all that, software licensing ranges -- the highest you'd ever find is, like, 3% of any IT-type project.
I don't know where he got those figures from, but 3% doesn't seem accurate. Those personnel, communications, and hardware costs are often unavoidable fixed costs. If you need a T-1 line between offices, that isn't going to change depending on what OS you are running. Why didn't he just go ahead and toss in the rest of the fixed costs?
"Gee, Linux isn't a lot cheaper over Windows Server if we factor in the cost of the building into the project."
most are saved by extensive use of special effects
And where do you think those brave CGI animators, and the courageous software engineers that support them, would have gotten their experience from? From tinkering with a hacked Xbox of course...
Actually, if you look at a lot of the most popular games for the Xbox, there isn't an awful lot of overlap between the console and the PC. Granted, there are some games like Splinter Cell that appeared on both around the same time, but a lot of RTS and RPGs never make it to the console, and many racing and fighting games never make it to the PC. To get your total gaming fix, you will need both a console and a PC. (The question is if the console is the PS2 or Xbox, but that is a whole other thread). With Microsoft having a stake in some game developers, you can be pretty confident it'll stay that way too.
Also if you look at any of the information out there about the Xbox2, even if only half of it is true, there will be a closer relationship between the console and a Windows PC. Streaming Windows Media files is one thing I've heard frequently, which would be motivation for the average user to keep Windows on their PC.
... or sporked.
You also have to remember it may not be the 'RIAA' that gives that $20K. Sony could give $20K, AOLTW $15K, Disney $20k, etc... And they can also give money in other ways, such as foundations or organizations that the politican could be part of. Think about how much trouble Clinton got into over large donations to his library.
I just assumed he drank a lot of very cheap wine
how come the bad guys are smart enough to heavily influence politics with their money but the good guys aren't?
Because people keep giving the 'bad' guys money. Have you bought a CD/DVD, gone to see a movie, or bought a book? You've just given money to the 'bad' guys. If you want the EFF to buy off a congressman, send them a $20 check instead of buying a CD. I don't have the figures, but I feel pretty confident that the EFF didn't bring in as much as AOL/TW last year.
Actually it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the students knew all along. I wonder if the average grade was higher there than elesewhere.
If Kazaa plans on making money from using other people's bandwidth, isn't that going to be in violation of some ISP's service agreements? I know my ISP prohibts "commercial" use, so if I share files and for which I am paid in some form, wouldn't that in violation of that agreement?
Granted, they don't seem to mind p2p right now unless they get a notice from the RIAA/MPAA, but if Kazaa goes legit I could see them demanding a piece of the pie too.
It is probably just an attempt to make the RIAA/MPAA look like the bad guys because they don't want to work with a p2p company. Then they can go to Congress, the courts, etc, and say they made a good-faith effort to get artists compensated. Could be the start of a legal defense using anti-trust laws if the RIAA/MPAA only work with some companies and not others.
Grocery workers like cashiers are unionized. I doubt Kroger's would be able to fire all their cashiers in one region, and not expect a backlash. During the day, the local grocery store has one person standing watch over the self-check lines. The human element will probably never go completely away, but the trend is to more automation, and that is true in just about every industry that employees low-wage labor.
If Wal-Mart goes to the trouble to set up a database of the serial numbers of every product you buy, and then develops the infrastructure necessary to send that information to any Wal-Mart every time you happen to walk in, they certainly WON'T share that information with, let's say, Target. It would be to Wal-Mart advantage to be the only one that knows your preferrences, and which products you are most price senstitive towards. It's the same reason a Kroger Plus card won't work at Big Bear.
even Microsoft Servers have to be rebooted every few days
I've seen a few Windows Servers where a couple days was pretty good uptime.
You have to keep in mind that you are dealing with people that see everyting in terms of absolutes. Be it in the form of religion, where you are told by God Himself what is right, or by greed, where whatever you do to make another dollar is right. RIAA - Anything they can do to keep control of the means of distribution is right, regardless of how those actions appear to others. If that requires scare tactics against their customers, so be it. Anything that in the short term reduces profits or control is wrong. Due process? It's too expensive to go before a judge, so side-step it with the DMCA. While there are individuals in the music industry that will see problems in the RIAA's stance, they tend to get buried under the groupthink for the time being. At some point hopefully those that see the shades of gray will take leadership positions, but until then it is just black and white. Ashcroft et al - Anything that could make America more secure is right, even if it goes against the very things that America what is. No abstact notions of 'the greater good' or the 'american ideal' just pure black hats vs. white hats. Corporations and governments tend not to see things in shades of gray. Why concern yourself with abstract notions of right or wrong in a boardroom or committee meeting, when you use money or power to influence what IS right or wrong?
There was also a piece on 20/20 a few months or so that was pretty pro-file-sharing. John Stossel for it, Barbara Walters was against (Barb you ignorant slut!). There was also a newsweek or time article (I get both, and can't remember which it was in) about DRM. Even had a nice graphic of a pair of hands handcuffed in front a computer screen. That kind of press will reach a lot of people that would never have cared about the DMCA before, or figured it wouldn't apply to anything they do. Hopefully that will draw more people over the 'free-speech' side, as posting anti-RIAA comments on /. is like preaching to the choir.
It is probably the same situation companies like Sony find themselves in with regards to tech organizations and the RIAA. If you diverify, you can wind up being a member in an organization that winds up opposing actions by another organization you are in. A house divided against itself if you will.
IBM has to walk a thin line between pushing open source (in the form of Linux) to weaken its competitors, and hold back open source where it could damage their money-making proprietary systems.
Granted this is most likely just a case where IBM wasn't fully aware beforehand, but I would expect to see situations like this more often in the future.
I'll wait for the ISS to appear on hotels.com before signing up. I have to find someway to save a buck...
Eh it is a combination of rooting for the underdog, and picking the lesser of two evils. If the situation was reversed and Apple had the overwhelming majority of the market, people would be crying foul over iTunes' DRM and their tying of software and hardware together. As it is, Apple is less of a threat than MS is thought to be, so they must be 'good.'
And a law like this is ripe for abuse. Wouldn't it cover just about any copywrited material? What about photos? Could the AP cripple someone's computer because a .jpg of a copyrighted image in someone's browser cache?
What about intent? If someone emails me a low-quality MP3 of a copyrighted song, does that give the RIAA permission to cripple my computer because I'm a pirate? What if I wasn't the one that downloaded the song, and it was my neighbour's kid that downloaded a song on my son's computer when I wasn't around? In a court of law, intent plays a part when a person is charged with theft, how could it not in this case?
This basically amounts to sub-contracting work out from the Judicial system. As soon as you start subbing out work, it starts going to the lowest bidder. Eventually all court proceedings will be carried out over videoconferrencing with a guy in India.
An equally large, and relevant, problem is the lawsuit culture present in the US. The reason everyone is trying to patent every possible idea no matter how abstract is that it our legal system tolerates lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. Instead of providing relief for a party that has been wronged, it has become a lottery, where the price a patent application could win you a big cash settlement.
Now I believe that the current patent system is badly broken and in need of a massive overhaul, but how much of the change should be made in the patent system, and how much in the courts?
Cisco announced an agreement to buy Linksys a cheap whore
Why can't my company make agreements like that! We just get boring ol' stock and cash deals.
I think someone has been listening to their Rage Against The Machine MP3s while watching Fight Club again. Pronoun overload...