I was bothering to reply meaningfully, but this typical/. "I'll take what I want" attitude isn't worth discussing. Congratulations on your brilliant plan. I can't wait to see it happen.
Oh, I understood it alright. I just couldn't believe it.
Let me try a simple analogy.
Great, this always works so well on Slashdot.
If you need your car fixed, you take it to a mechanic.
Right off that bat, your analogy fails. Mechanics are not content producers.
You discuss what needs to be done and what it'll cost, and once the job is done, so is your business relationship.
Yup, seems about right. So far you've stay in the shallow end.
He doesn't do the work for free...
Goodbye shallow, hello deep. Are you asserting that creatives (for lack of a better umbrella term) work for free and don't get paid until someone buys their product? That's not exactly right. You see, there are people... well, I won't spoil the surprise. Read on.
and then charge you a few bucks every time you use the car, what you need from him is his skill at diagnosing and repairing car trouble, so you pay him directly for that. If he wants to get paid again, he finds another car to fix instead of trying to squeeze more money out of the work he already did.
Are you aware of the enormous cost involved in producing content? Even factoring out the inflated salaries of actors, you can't make a movie with any kind of production value without millions of dollars. Music, in turn, costs bunches of money to produce as well. Software is an tremendous investment for anything non-trivial.
On the other hand, how much investment do you think it takes the mechanic to fix an individual car? Oh, sure, his tools cost him quite a bit of money. The difference here: a mechanic's tools work on the first car, the last car, and an arbitrarily large number of cars in between. His amortized tool cost approaches zero, so he can charge much less for his service, since his time is all he is being paid for.
What I need from the movie industry in general is their skill at crafting movies.
Yup, and I'm willing to bet the rates at which they would charge that skill out are well beyond your pocket.
This sort of reminds me of the executive mentality - anything you can't do must be easy, right? Therefore it must not be worth much. In your case you've taken it all the way to free.
I'll happily chip in to fund the production of something I think I'll like, but I don't want to pay anyone else to give me a copy of it once it's finished; I can copy bits and burn DVDs myself.
The duplication costs are so little as to be ignorable anyway. You've offered to take the least burdensome piece of the process away, and in exchange you offer removing, or at least reducing, the reward. Interesting concept.
Paying directly for the production, rather than paying after the fact for a copy, makes intuitive sense and as a business model it's completely immune to piracy.
Feel free to do that - there are these people, call "Producers, whose very task is to fund the "Production" of content, and assume the risk or losing money or the reward of making it. You are welcome to join them with your contribution. They may not agree with your assertion that it's immune to piracy... but go to town. Of course, if you're talking about throwing them 20 bucks or so, feel free to just go to the store and buy a copy, because that's the way it works now.
Don't worry, I didn't really miss your point. You're speaking of a communistic approach to content creation. As a content creator myself, my response is "Make me." I intend to make money with my talent, whether you want me to or not.
I'll finish up with a question for you - what exactly (aside from vanishingly small sums of theoretical money) do you contribute to content production?
Your post is so far out in space I can't even craft a coherent reply. I'm actually physically shaking my head in disbelief. Your opinion, sir, astounds me. Please tell me you've not reproduced.
it does not reduce your freedom (if you don't want to "lease" music, you can go without it, or play your own).
No, no, no. You've got it all wrong. I have the inborn right (not granted by my creator, there is no creator, this right just exists) to have all content ever produced, in any format I choose, for whatever price I deem worth paying, to do with as I wish. Anything less is an unconscionable breach, completely immoral, and worthy of disdain.
Some of the most damning data that I saw was IT employment and H1-B visa data for the state of Connecticut for 2003. 78,000 IT workers in Connecticut were layed off that year. But that very same year, employers in Connecticut requested (and got) 68,000 more H1-B visa slots allotted to them that same year.
I guess it needs to be pointed out to you that this paragraph is essentially meaningless. These number do not correlate in any way, unless you can demonstrate that the companies which did the laying off also made the H1 requests. In particular, can you demonstrate that non-H1 workers were specifically replaced? I suspect not.
Basically, you've written from the point of view of a protectionist racist.
Here is the executive summary of the comments posted to this story so far, written in the first person:
I've never worked on anything even approaching the complexity of the Windows OS, but I know exactly how to do it, and I can do it better than Microsoft. Windows has obviously failed, and all the alternatives are obviously better. Despite the fact that Linux is only a kernel, not a complete OS, and faces nothing near the problems a project the size of Windows faces, I'm going to make the invalid comparison between the projects anyway in an attempt to whore up a few mod points. Oh yeah, and everyone Microsoft hires is shit - only OSS coders have any skill.
You must be astroturfing unless you bash Microsoft and/or praise Linux. Take your balanced opinion elsewhere - this is/., the home of the One True Way.
There's no way to get 97% efficiency without a new set of physical laws. At least not as we understand the universe... I could be proven wrong some time in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
Joining a union is pretty much pledging a portion of your salary to the DNC. I don't need that mess.
HAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHA
HAHA
Thanks, I needed that. Now I'm gonna go find some java guy who wants to write his db access code in a JSP.
Seriously. I'm so damn tired of developers adding features to software. If I wanted my computer to do things for me... wait, I forgot my point.
I have sort of a pinkish tan hue.
Have a looksee
I would start by trying to get someone on the internet to do my homework for me.
Oh, wait, you've already come that far. Well, I'm stumped now. Good luck!
Well, I no longer have the freedom to choose which dominant operating system vendor to hate. I think that one is their fault.
Here, have a look
caused several state's to literally drop off the map
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
I was bothering to reply meaningfully, but this typical /. "I'll take what I want" attitude isn't worth discussing. Congratulations on your brilliant plan. I can't wait to see it happen.
Sorry you couldn't understand it.
Oh, I understood it alright. I just couldn't believe it.
Let me try a simple analogy.
Great, this always works so well on Slashdot.
If you need your car fixed, you take it to a mechanic.
Right off that bat, your analogy fails. Mechanics are not content producers.
You discuss what needs to be done and what it'll cost, and once the job is done, so is your business relationship.
Yup, seems about right. So far you've stay in the shallow end.
He doesn't do the work for free...
Goodbye shallow, hello deep. Are you asserting that creatives (for lack of a better umbrella term) work for free and don't get paid until someone buys their product? That's not exactly right. You see, there are people... well, I won't spoil the surprise. Read on.
and then charge you a few bucks every time you use the car, what you need from him is his skill at diagnosing and repairing car trouble, so you pay him directly for that. If he wants to get paid again, he finds another car to fix instead of trying to squeeze more money out of the work he already did.
Are you aware of the enormous cost involved in producing content? Even factoring out the inflated salaries of actors, you can't make a movie with any kind of production value without millions of dollars. Music, in turn, costs bunches of money to produce as well. Software is an tremendous investment for anything non-trivial.
On the other hand, how much investment do you think it takes the mechanic to fix an individual car? Oh, sure, his tools cost him quite a bit of money. The difference here: a mechanic's tools work on the first car, the last car, and an arbitrarily large number of cars in between. His amortized tool cost approaches zero, so he can charge much less for his service, since his time is all he is being paid for.
What I need from the movie industry in general is their skill at crafting movies.
Yup, and I'm willing to bet the rates at which they would charge that skill out are well beyond your pocket.
This sort of reminds me of the executive mentality - anything you can't do must be easy, right? Therefore it must not be worth much. In your case you've taken it all the way to free.
I'll happily chip in to fund the production of something I think I'll like, but I don't want to pay anyone else to give me a copy of it once it's finished; I can copy bits and burn DVDs myself.
The duplication costs are so little as to be ignorable anyway. You've offered to take the least burdensome piece of the process away, and in exchange you offer removing, or at least reducing, the reward. Interesting concept.
Paying directly for the production, rather than paying after the fact for a copy, makes intuitive sense and as a business model it's completely immune to piracy.
Feel free to do that - there are these people, call "Producers, whose very task is to fund the "Production" of content, and assume the risk or losing money or the reward of making it. You are welcome to join them with your contribution. They may not agree with your assertion that it's immune to piracy... but go to town. Of course, if you're talking about throwing them 20 bucks or so, feel free to just go to the store and buy a copy, because that's the way it works now.
Don't worry, I didn't really miss your point. You're speaking of a communistic approach to content creation. As a content creator myself, my response is "Make me." I intend to make money with my talent, whether you want me to or not.
I'll finish up with a question for you - what exactly (aside from vanishingly small sums of theoretical money) do you contribute to content production?
Your post is so far out in space I can't even craft a coherent reply. I'm actually physically shaking my head in disbelief. Your opinion, sir, astounds me. Please tell me you've not reproduced.
it does not reduce your freedom (if you don't want to "lease" music, you can go without it, or play your own).
No, no, no. You've got it all wrong. I have the inborn right (not granted by my creator, there is no creator, this right just exists) to have all content ever produced, in any format I choose, for whatever price I deem worth paying, to do with as I wish. Anything less is an unconscionable breach, completely immoral, and worthy of disdain.
I'm just guessing here, so feel free to correct me, but I get the feeling you want to have about 10,000 of Mr. Whedon's babies.
Get the scientists working on the tube technology
Some of the most damning data that I saw was IT employment and H1-B visa data for the state of Connecticut for 2003. 78,000 IT workers in Connecticut were layed off that year. But that very same year, employers in Connecticut requested (and got) 68,000 more H1-B visa slots allotted to them that same year.
I guess it needs to be pointed out to you that this paragraph is essentially meaningless. These number do not correlate in any way, unless you can demonstrate that the companies which did the laying off also made the H1 requests. In particular, can you demonstrate that non-H1 workers were specifically replaced? I suspect not.
Basically, you've written from the point of view of a protectionist racist.
Is a "'puter" what they give you when you sign up for AOL?
Here is the executive summary of the comments posted to this story so far, written in the first person:
I've never worked on anything even approaching the complexity of the Windows OS, but I know exactly how to do it, and I can do it better than Microsoft. Windows has obviously failed, and all the alternatives are obviously better. Despite the fact that Linux is only a kernel, not a complete OS, and faces nothing near the problems a project the size of Windows faces, I'm going to make the invalid comparison between the projects anyway in an attempt to whore up a few mod points. Oh yeah, and everyone Microsoft hires is shit - only OSS coders have any skill.
I think that covers it.
I don't know who these people think they are, trying to make money. They should get with the new times and give everything away.
Links?
You must be astroturfing unless you bash Microsoft and/or praise Linux. Take your balanced opinion elsewhere - this is /., the home of the One True Way.
All posts marked "Funny" will be mod'ed or metamod'ed down.
So you're sort of like the town fathers in Footloose, huh?
Yeah, I remember those days. They sucked.
I have this great theory that you know what the hell you're talking about, but it fails in reality. Where is the fault in this situation?
There's no way to get 97% efficiency without a new set of physical laws. At least not as we understand the universe... I could be proven wrong some time in the future.