Ask most people about their cars. They know that they have to take driving lessons, they know that they need servicing and that they need repairs and a AAA/AA membership card in case it breaks down.
No car manufacturer tries to make out that dealing with a breakdown (beyond fixing a tyre) is easy. No-one thinks they can just go for years without essential maintenance and protection for their cars. But a lot of people don't defrag or backup.
I'm convinced there's a "net station" market out there, where people have a near-solid state machine and all their data is stored online. Where you pay a small cost for the box, and a monthly subscription for all the support.
Firstly, you have to make a point of starting with a blank sheet of paper. Then, you work out over a time the bare minimum set of simple, clear laws. Doing the same with taxation also makes sense.
The problem right now is that we have hundreds of small laws and taxes. And our solution is generally to add another law to correct problems with an existing one, instead of reforming the law.
As the person that often gets called on for tech support from neighbours and friends, this is just not the case.
Now, some friends of mine have PCs from certain brands that are very reliable. But there's at least two well-advertised brands in the UK that I tell people to avoid like the plague.
Why? Because they put garbage in their machines. They put in the cheapest stuff they can find that meets their advertised specification. Then, when something goes wrong (because they bought the cheapest HDD they could get), you spend an hour in a queue to speak to someone.
The cash reserves are irrelevant because it's not just about it sustaining operating cost.
Microsoft are a company with stockholders. Let's say that the company delivers no profit, no dividend and no stock price growth.
As a stockholder, would you be happy that you'd made no money and they had a massive cash reserve sitting there? Of course not. You'd do one of two things - demand a slice of the cash or take your shares elsewhere.
IBM shifted what they did and became primarily a services company. They were always hot at dealing with clients in a sales situation, and having worked with them, they are professional.
The problem for Microsoft is where to go. They'll be able to defend the desktop for a while, but there's a possible snowball effect going to occur. The more people switch, the more Linux hardware/software/games, the more people can switch.
They don't have much of a services division, they don't really do hardware. Their software isn't generally sold as "we'll send engineers in to install it".
The big danger for them that I perceive is webapps. I am seeing more and more development going on that is internal webapps. Companies are writing stuff for internal use to operate through a browser. Even if that's in ASP.NET (and you write it to be compliant), you've decoupled the desktop and server. Companies don't have to do much rewriting of applications to then switch desktops to Mac/Linux.
Not taking anything away from Peter Jackson (he did a superb job and this is the contract, so he's entitled to it) but I'm surprised he got so much. I'm even surprised he got the gig in the first place.
His previous directing credits included The Frighteners, Heavenly Creatures and Bad Taste. And he gets a 3 film mega-budget movie to direct?
It appears that New Line think that because he's been paid enough, that he should be paid no more? Is that what they're saying?
Tell you what, how about I start churning out copies of the LOTR trilogy, Magnolia and others? Because after all, you've made plenty of money out them.
You talk about how "piracy" deprives the people who make the movies out of money, and then do this?
I can't believe the hypocrisy of this case. If there's a genuine dispute over a contract, fair enough, but arguing that someone's made enough is disgusting.
I have a lawyer that I use sometimes for business contracts and they spot all sorts of little problems and make slight alterations. And they are not expensive.
Are you telling me that Stan Lee couldn't afford a hotshot entertainment lawyer that would have told him what every movie geek under the sun knows?
Running a car costs about £4/gallon (about $7). If you do 30,000 miles, getting 30 instead of 15 saves you £4,000 a year.
The US price is about 1/3rd ($2.20). That means that instead of a £4,000 saving, it's more like £1,500. Maybe people can cope with that sort of annual cost.
PS I'm thinking of switching from my old car to a diesel - the switch will start to pay for itself quite quickly.
It's more than vanity. Mine is more about stimulating debate and thinking.
Sometimes, it's just about being nice to people (like if I find a cool site). There's a hope that the right keywords might help someone find something. If you have a look at mine (no, I'm not traffic seeking), you'll see there are all sorts of posts, nearly all about things I've seen or heard, or some political opinions.
BT Was originally designed for moving large files around and it's been great for things like OSS projects.
I'll download an OpenOffice.org beta and then leave the torrent supplying back for a few hours - frequently giving back well over 100%. Cost of bandwidth to OOo? Very little.
I think that if someone tried to argue that BT was purely about illegal materials, they'd have thousands of people willing to give testimony.
You can benefit from the illegal use, you just can't promote the illegal uses.
If a bank inadvertedly (and after taking reasonable steps to ensure it doesn't happen) launders money, they make money on it. They just can't go encouraging it's use or not taking reasonable steps to ensure that it occurs.
Unless there's some "interest paid to the state" rule in money laundering law that I am unaware of.
Is there anything in the part about "by examining factors such as how companies marketed the product" or whether they took easily available steps to reduce infringing uses."
I think the point is this:-
If you are running a site doing file trading like a legal torrent site, it's no good to say "but it's none of our responsibility" if at the same time your marketing drive is towards illegal trading (which probably means things like emails between the creators saying "put something on the warez boards about our 'legal torrents' site;) and we'll get all the pirates using it.").
However, if you are running a legal torrent site and if you check it and spot obviously illegal files, you take them down/suspend the user, or if people report them, you take them down/suspend the user.
I think legal file sharing (eg torrents of distros/OOo) are safe.
Anyway, all illegal traffic will just go somewhere else in the world. My guess is that the RIAA/MPAA just gave themselves an even bigger problem.
I can get a 3G card for the UK, but prices are a complete pisstake for the download volume per month.
As a result, it means I have to go find a wifi hotspot. But if I'm working away, that means I'm not sitting in the middle of Exmoor or Salisbury Plain. It means I'm in the centre of London or on the edge of Manchester.
I use hotspots a lot, and of all the places I've ever worked, even the very smallest place had a hotspot within a mile of it.
This is a different market to phones. With a phone, you generally want to make a call NOW, and you need to receive calls. For data, you can often just park down - it's not like you can look up figures while standing in the middle of the street - you need to sit down.
3G cards may take off, but not at current prices, and hotspots are becoming more and more common (with very cheap kit). And if you know about the UK, the people who bought 3G licenses paid a stack of money out for them - that means they have to start paying back.
I can get 500 mins/month for less than £25 (about $40). A 3G card at £53/month will give me a massive (not!) 450mb of data transfer per month.
Slashdot Mirror
Ask most people about their cars. They know that they have to take driving lessons, they know that they need servicing and that they need repairs and a AAA/AA membership card in case it breaks down.
No car manufacturer tries to make out that dealing with a breakdown (beyond fixing a tyre) is easy. No-one thinks they can just go for years without essential maintenance and protection for their cars. But a lot of people don't defrag or backup.
I'm convinced there's a "net station" market out there, where people have a near-solid state machine and all their data is stored online. Where you pay a small cost for the box, and a monthly subscription for all the support.
The problem right now is that we have hundreds of small laws and taxes. And our solution is generally to add another law to correct problems with an existing one, instead of reforming the law.
As the person that often gets called on for tech support from neighbours and friends, this is just not the case.
Now, some friends of mine have PCs from certain brands that are very reliable. But there's at least two well-advertised brands in the UK that I tell people to avoid like the plague.
Why? Because they put garbage in their machines. They put in the cheapest stuff they can find that meets their advertised specification. Then, when something goes wrong (because they bought the cheapest HDD they could get), you spend an hour in a queue to speak to someone.
Or how about Marx and Communism?
What about Bacchus? Would that put an end to the government banging on about "binge drinking"? (3 pints isn't binge drinking, it's a short lunch)
If people are spreading lies, these can be countered.
Microsoft are a company with stockholders. Let's say that the company delivers no profit, no dividend and no stock price growth.
As a stockholder, would you be happy that you'd made no money and they had a massive cash reserve sitting there? Of course not. You'd do one of two things - demand a slice of the cash or take your shares elsewhere.
Now, if you were a shareholder and started seeing no stock growth, would you just want that sitting there, or would you want a slice of it?
Shhh. Bill might be listening.
If shareholders don't see stock growth, what do you think they'll start taking an interest in?
If it had arrived in the mid-80s, it would probably be the primary UI for many people.
I know a lot of people with boxed versions of voice recognition, and no-one who uses it.
To be honest, other than OEM sales, I don't see Longhorn being a big seller.
The problem for Microsoft is where to go. They'll be able to defend the desktop for a while, but there's a possible snowball effect going to occur. The more people switch, the more Linux hardware/software/games, the more people can switch.
They don't have much of a services division, they don't really do hardware. Their software isn't generally sold as "we'll send engineers in to install it".
The big danger for them that I perceive is webapps. I am seeing more and more development going on that is internal webapps. Companies are writing stuff for internal use to operate through a browser. Even if that's in ASP.NET (and you write it to be compliant), you've decoupled the desktop and server. Companies don't have to do much rewriting of applications to then switch desktops to Mac/Linux.
His previous directing credits included The Frighteners, Heavenly Creatures and Bad Taste. And he gets a 3 film mega-budget movie to direct?
Tell you what, how about I start churning out copies of the LOTR trilogy, Magnolia and others? Because after all, you've made plenty of money out them.
You talk about how "piracy" deprives the people who make the movies out of money, and then do this?
I can't believe the hypocrisy of this case. If there's a genuine dispute over a contract, fair enough, but arguing that someone's made enough is disgusting.
I have a lawyer that I use sometimes for business contracts and they spot all sorts of little problems and make slight alterations. And they are not expensive.
Are you telling me that Stan Lee couldn't afford a hotshot entertainment lawyer that would have told him what every movie geek under the sun knows?
Running a car costs about £4/gallon (about $7). If you do 30,000 miles, getting 30 instead of 15 saves you £4,000 a year.
The US price is about 1/3rd ($2.20). That means that instead of a £4,000 saving, it's more like £1,500. Maybe people can cope with that sort of annual cost.
PS I'm thinking of switching from my old car to a diesel - the switch will start to pay for itself quite quickly.
We just don't know if we will "have better technology" quickly enough.
The BBC are experimenting with it too, putting radio shows out as podcasts.
Sometimes, it's just about being nice to people (like if I find a cool site). There's a hope that the right keywords might help someone find something. If you have a look at mine (no, I'm not traffic seeking), you'll see there are all sorts of posts, nearly all about things I've seen or heard, or some political opinions.
Journalist is going to be like everything in the future. It will be something you do, not what you are.
I'll download an OpenOffice.org beta and then leave the torrent supplying back for a few hours - frequently giving back well over 100%. Cost of bandwidth to OOo? Very little.
I think that if someone tried to argue that BT was purely about illegal materials, they'd have thousands of people willing to give testimony.
If a bank inadvertedly (and after taking reasonable steps to ensure it doesn't happen) launders money, they make money on it. They just can't go encouraging it's use or not taking reasonable steps to ensure that it occurs.
Unless there's some "interest paid to the state" rule in money laundering law that I am unaware of.
I think the point is this:-
If you are running a site doing file trading like a legal torrent site, it's no good to say "but it's none of our responsibility" if at the same time your marketing drive is towards illegal trading (which probably means things like emails between the creators saying "put something on the warez boards about our 'legal torrents' site ;) and we'll get all the pirates using it.").
However, if you are running a legal torrent site and if you check it and spot obviously illegal files, you take them down/suspend the user, or if people report them, you take them down/suspend the user.
I think legal file sharing (eg torrents of distros/OOo) are safe.
Anyway, all illegal traffic will just go somewhere else in the world. My guess is that the RIAA/MPAA just gave themselves an even bigger problem.
I can get a 3G card for the UK, but prices are a complete pisstake for the download volume per month.
As a result, it means I have to go find a wifi hotspot. But if I'm working away, that means I'm not sitting in the middle of Exmoor or Salisbury Plain. It means I'm in the centre of London or on the edge of Manchester.
I use hotspots a lot, and of all the places I've ever worked, even the very smallest place had a hotspot within a mile of it.
This is a different market to phones. With a phone, you generally want to make a call NOW, and you need to receive calls. For data, you can often just park down - it's not like you can look up figures while standing in the middle of the street - you need to sit down.
3G cards may take off, but not at current prices, and hotspots are becoming more and more common (with very cheap kit). And if you know about the UK, the people who bought 3G licenses paid a stack of money out for them - that means they have to start paying back.
I can get 500 mins/month for less than £25 (about $40). A 3G card at £53/month will give me a massive (not!) 450mb of data transfer per month.