>bad because of its lack of noise, there's less warnings to the pedestrians
So THAT'S why I keep getting run over by bicyclists! You know, I've been lobbying to make it a legal requirement for kids to start putting playing cards back in their spokes for just that reason!
You're right; it is just a natural progression. But they also took the next step (another "natural progression") from thinking about it, and actually built the darn thing, so I say kudos to them.
I, for one, will welcome the results of the real-world tests of this thing. If it works as well as they claim, they could put those wheel-gines in all sorts of vehicles. And based on the size of them, I'd say they're going in large vehicles first. Can you imagine the Hummer ad campaign when the release a vehicle that is more fuel efficient than a Toyota Echo?
It seems like a strong possibility that, now that they have reaped the rewards of the initial FUD campaign's effect on their stock, the folks over at SCO are continuing this fight not because they think they can win, but because they have to in order to justify the gains they have made.
My thinking is that there is a strong possibility that they know this is totall b*llsh*t, and that--just maybe--it's documented somewhere.
So here's my plan: all us slashdotters should buy a few shares each of SCO stock. This might let us get a significant vote in the next shareholder meeting, but that's not even the real point. The real point is that we could mount a major shareholder lawsuit if it turns out--as we all are assuming--that the emperor has no clothes.
The nice thing about this plan is that if it turns out that they've been right all along, and that IBM owes them $3billion, then we sell our stock when the decision comes through and make a little profit off it all.
Of course, the one downside to it is that all of/. buying 10 shares of SCO could cause another price spike that would let Darl and Co. sell off more shares to their own personal profit... D'oh!
> Lets not forget other possible usage of the link, like transportation of goods
I've been saying for years that a rail line between Morocco and the European mainland would make it far more profitable to import that fine Moroccan hashish we all know and love!
I agree with you in concept, and that sort of typo annoys me, too. But I think we all know what the poster meant, and with that one exception, the post was pretty clean, as far as/. goes. Let's be vigilant, yes. But with some compassion for simple errors which should not outweigh the insights in a comment.
Now, before you respond to me, breathe deeply and count to teen...
Another way to stop this would be to use a robots.txt file to ensure that your pages aren't indexed by a search engine.
Just a wee little conspiracy theory
on
Who Needs Radio?
·
· Score: 1
This article IS on MSnbc, isn't it? And isn't Microsoft launching their own competitor to iTunes soon? I can't find my article to back this up, but that is indeed my understanding.
Now I realize that they mentioned (future) competitors iTMS and Napster, but MS is pretty cagey about the PR that they do. By validating their competitors before they get into the market, MS grows the market and gets the early entrants to make all the mistakes before they make their own foray into the market.
Some may say that the early bird gets the word, but it's an old business adage that the second mouse gets the cheese. The fact that an arm of MS is embracing on-line music as being something that obsoletes radio is a sinister indicator as to what the parent company may be planning to do.
I'd like to think that society is more dynamic than you describe. If people are breeding out of control such that resources are depleted faster than they can be replentished, then *something* would have to happen. Controls on births? Maybe. A return to working for some or all of society? Maybe.
Even what you describe sounds better than the logical extension of what is happening now with 90% of the world working inhumane hours in terrible conditions and still starving.
> Or maybe I'm just an old and pessimistic jaded fart
That makes two of us. I wish I disagreed with you, but I think you're wrong. Unfortunately, what I said about what must happen is still true. And since it won't, that does not bode well for mankind.
Re:Nice to see the technology is catching up...
on
Robot Sales Are Exploding
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
> what do we do with all the people who will soon be unemployed by robots?
Well, it would be my hope that society would finally have the luxury to realize that there is a value to every individual born into this world. In a capitalist society, automation favors the capitalists, as it continues to lower costs of production. However, as you point out, there becomes a point where that is no longer a benefit, as the consumer pool dries up.
At a certain point, a capitalist society has to mature beyond the infantile state of "mine!" that defines capitalism, and take care of all of its members, so that all of them can reach their full potential. If the resources are available to make it possible to feed, clothe, house and provide medical care for everyone, then it becomes the world's moral responsibility to do so; not doing so would be simply punitive and inhumane.
Don't get me wrong; I think that capitalism is good. It's a developmental phase for a society, much like the terrible twos are for a child. But once it is possible to transition away from it, I believe it is criminal not to do so.
So what do we do with those people? We educate them. We care for them. We make them responsible for finding their own way to give back to the world.
When people are healthy, happy and fed, they tend to surprise everyone in a positive way.
For a great model of how this shouldn't happen, read The Grapes of Wrath. It's a tale of the rich getting richer through automation and political power. Starving farmers forced off their land and held back by police as they watch perfectly good produce rotting away in fields so that the corporate farmers can keep prices up. This sort of thing is inevitable on small scales; it's up to all of us to be wary and make sure that it does not happen again on such a large scale or we will all lose.
We have lots of van Goghs since the advent of photoshop. We also have lots of amazingly bad artwork, but the percentages are probably similar to before. If 95% of all self-titled artists are terrible, 4% are good and 1% are amazing, then a tenfold increase in the number of people with the tools to create great art means that, although we might have a lot more bad art than before, we also have a lot more good art. Have you ever seen a Fark photoshop contest? There's a great example of this phenomenon.
It reminds me of the joke where some guy breaks his arm, and weeks later, when the doctor removes his cast, the patient asks, "Doc, will I be able to play violin now?" The doctor comforts him by responding, "Like a virtuoso!", to which the patient says, "Great! I really stank before!!"
Not everyone with arms is a great violinist, but you have to admit that the more people with arms, the more chances there are for great violinists to exist.
Have you ever been in serious contract negotiation? I mean, even like to buy a car or something? There are people who do this sort of thing all the time (i.e. car salesmen and record company execs) and people who don't (your average car buyer and your average musician getting their first contract).
People who are used to doing this sort of thing are very good at portraying a contract as being totally benign, and just ignore this paragraph! Those silly lawyers require it, but it doesn't really apply to you... Next thing you know, the majority of people who sign contracts do so without having really read or understood them.
Yes, it's everybody's responsibility to do so, but, gosh, when you bought your last car, did you REALLY read the whole warranty agreement? How about the agreement for the extended warranty that you paid another $800.00 for? And what about the loan terms? Are there pre-payment penalties in case you pay your car off early to save on interest? If you did, you're in the minority.
So even though it is the signor's responsibility to understand what they are signing, it's also true that the people writing the contract shouldn't be writing unethical terms in just because they can get someone to sign. If my auto loan contract required that I give my first born son to the loan agent, there is no way in heck I would let that be enforced, even if it was my fault that I didn't see it in the contract.
In theory, everyone reads their contracts. In practice, they don't, but people still deserve protection from predatory business people.
I'm talking about the Metallicas of the world who make millions and do a couple of shows a week and spend the rest of the time hanging out.
I believe that touring is a good way for a band to earn their keep. The kind of touring you're talking about is for smaller bands who are still trying to get established; bigger bands could definitely stand to do more touring if they need to make up for napster-esque "losses".
Yes, I have toured, back when I had a garage band, King Lazy Bones. And it was hard and we made no money. But if I was making millions and only had to do one show a week, I'd choose that over my main gig any day.
The deal is, if you've created something that people are willing to pay for, then why should other people be able to benefit from it and not you?
I once met the guy who wrote the book "Escape From Alcatraz". He was about 70 years old and was cashing a check at the grocery store where I worked as a teenager. He explained that a few copies a week get sold to tourists who visit the jail, and, so he continues to get a little portion of that revenue. He wrote the book, people still want the book; why should anyone be able to sell it and keep all the profits to themselves?
Some artists even use that power for good. Peter Gabriel donated the rights to his song "Come Talk to Me" to an environmental group, which then licensed it to MCI for a commercial, enabling them to lobby to save thousands of acres of rainforest. Trust me; it's a good thing. And if you don't think artists should get copyright protection for years, well, then you certainly shouldn't be behind the record companies getting it instead.
Slashdot Mirror
So THAT'S why I keep getting run over by bicyclists! You know, I've been lobbying to make it a legal requirement for kids to start putting playing cards back in their spokes for just that reason!
I can't smell bikes coming, either. Gosh darned quiet, clean-running vehicles!
Customer: My batteries won't hold a charge.
Appl^H^H^Huto Maker Support: Well, the batteries cost, like, $25,000. You may as well just get a new car.
I, for one, will welcome the results of the real-world tests of this thing. If it works as well as they claim, they could put those wheel-gines in all sorts of vehicles. And based on the size of them, I'd say they're going in large vehicles first. Can you imagine the Hummer ad campaign when the release a vehicle that is more fuel efficient than a Toyota Echo?
Can I hire your two-year-old to replace my iPod battery?
I, for one, welcome our new iTunes and QuickTime overlords.
My thinking is that there is a strong possibility that they know this is totall b*llsh*t, and that--just maybe--it's documented somewhere.
So here's my plan: all us slashdotters should buy a few shares each of SCO stock. This might let us get a significant vote in the next shareholder meeting, but that's not even the real point. The real point is that we could mount a major shareholder lawsuit if it turns out--as we all are assuming--that the emperor has no clothes.
The nice thing about this plan is that if it turns out that they've been right all along, and that IBM owes them $3billion, then we sell our stock when the decision comes through and make a little profit off it all.
Of course, the one downside to it is that all of /. buying 10 shares of SCO could cause another price spike that would let Darl and Co. sell off more shares to their own personal profit... D'oh!
I've been saying for years that a rail line between Morocco and the European mainland would make it far more profitable to import that fine Moroccan hashish we all know and love!
Now, before you respond to me, breathe deeply and count to teen...
what the problems were?
>or back up my stuff onto it?
If you burn a linux distro, your penny will go to SCO because they really own Linux!
Everything which has
a beginning has an end,
believe it or not.
I'll prob'ly revise it when I can think of something better. One of my best haiku was for Kill Bill:
Fallen flower drifts
down river red with rivals'
freely flowing blood.
Another way to stop this would be to use a robots.txt file to ensure that your pages aren't indexed by a search engine.
Now I realize that they mentioned (future) competitors iTMS and Napster, but MS is pretty cagey about the PR that they do. By validating their competitors before they get into the market, MS grows the market and gets the early entrants to make all the mistakes before they make their own foray into the market.
Some may say that the early bird gets the word, but it's an old business adage that the second mouse gets the cheese. The fact that an arm of MS is embracing on-line music as being something that obsoletes radio is a sinister indicator as to what the parent company may be planning to do.
Even what you describe sounds better than the logical extension of what is happening now with 90% of the world working inhumane hours in terrible conditions and still starving.
That makes two of us. I wish I disagreed with you, but I think you're wrong. Unfortunately, what I said about what must happen is still true. And since it won't, that does not bode well for mankind.
Well, it would be my hope that society would finally have the luxury to realize that there is a value to every individual born into this world. In a capitalist society, automation favors the capitalists, as it continues to lower costs of production. However, as you point out, there becomes a point where that is no longer a benefit, as the consumer pool dries up.
At a certain point, a capitalist society has to mature beyond the infantile state of "mine!" that defines capitalism, and take care of all of its members, so that all of them can reach their full potential. If the resources are available to make it possible to feed, clothe, house and provide medical care for everyone, then it becomes the world's moral responsibility to do so; not doing so would be simply punitive and inhumane.
Don't get me wrong; I think that capitalism is good. It's a developmental phase for a society, much like the terrible twos are for a child. But once it is possible to transition away from it, I believe it is criminal not to do so.
So what do we do with those people? We educate them. We care for them. We make them responsible for finding their own way to give back to the world.
When people are healthy, happy and fed, they tend to surprise everyone in a positive way.
For a great model of how this shouldn't happen, read The Grapes of Wrath. It's a tale of the rich getting richer through automation and political power. Starving farmers forced off their land and held back by police as they watch perfectly good produce rotting away in fields so that the corporate farmers can keep prices up. This sort of thing is inevitable on small scales; it's up to all of us to be wary and make sure that it does not happen again on such a large scale or we will all lose.
if you had a beowulf cluster of these things?
Wait! Wait! Wait! I've got a million lines of SCO code I want to insert!
It reminds me of the joke where some guy breaks his arm, and weeks later, when the doctor removes his cast, the patient asks, "Doc, will I be able to play violin now?" The doctor comforts him by responding, "Like a virtuoso!", to which the patient says, "Great! I really stank before!!"
Not everyone with arms is a great violinist, but you have to admit that the more people with arms, the more chances there are for great violinists to exist.
People who are used to doing this sort of thing are very good at portraying a contract as being totally benign, and just ignore this paragraph! Those silly lawyers require it, but it doesn't really apply to you... Next thing you know, the majority of people who sign contracts do so without having really read or understood them.
Yes, it's everybody's responsibility to do so, but, gosh, when you bought your last car, did you REALLY read the whole warranty agreement? How about the agreement for the extended warranty that you paid another $800.00 for? And what about the loan terms? Are there pre-payment penalties in case you pay your car off early to save on interest? If you did, you're in the minority.
So even though it is the signor's responsibility to understand what they are signing, it's also true that the people writing the contract shouldn't be writing unethical terms in just because they can get someone to sign. If my auto loan contract required that I give my first born son to the loan agent, there is no way in heck I would let that be enforced, even if it was my fault that I didn't see it in the contract.
In theory, everyone reads their contracts. In practice, they don't, but people still deserve protection from predatory business people.
That's exactly the point. I think the artists should be getting those royalties, not the record companies.
I believe that touring is a good way for a band to earn their keep. The kind of touring you're talking about is for smaller bands who are still trying to get established; bigger bands could definitely stand to do more touring if they need to make up for napster-esque "losses".
Yes, I have toured, back when I had a garage band, King Lazy Bones. And it was hard and we made no money. But if I was making millions and only had to do one show a week, I'd choose that over my main gig any day.
Larger, but not as much larger than it already is. It's still at least somewhat fairer to the buying public...
I once met the guy who wrote the book "Escape From Alcatraz". He was about 70 years old and was cashing a check at the grocery store where I worked as a teenager. He explained that a few copies a week get sold to tourists who visit the jail, and, so he continues to get a little portion of that revenue. He wrote the book, people still want the book; why should anyone be able to sell it and keep all the profits to themselves?
Some artists even use that power for good. Peter Gabriel donated the rights to his song "Come Talk to Me" to an environmental group, which then licensed it to MCI for a commercial, enabling them to lobby to save thousands of acres of rainforest. Trust me; it's a good thing. And if you don't think artists should get copyright protection for years, well, then you certainly shouldn't be behind the record companies getting it instead.
I disagree. Record execs must be somewhat intelligent in order to get away with murder like they do...