Did anyone else notice that, in this interview, they said $2.56 was binary 10,000,000, eg. a one followed by seven zeros?? I won't fall for it, I want my extra zero...
There is a debate about whether granting stock options should be an expense on a company's balance sheet: One strong argument for expensing options is that while difficult to value, they nonetheless have value.
Similarly, while a pirated digital copy might be easy to create and difficult to value, it certainly has value. Wealth can't come from nothing.
Consequently, the value of an original digital good is determined not only by its physical attributes, but by the optionality that it could be copied down the road. This is distict from whether it actually is copied down the road - just like a stock option may never be exercised, and yet it has value today.
The current situation is likely that digital good prices are higher (than non-digital) not just because of piracy, but because of the possibility of piracy, as this optionality is somewhat priced in. Governmental protection of copyright and the fear of its consequences keeps this additional price small. Indeed, their purpose is to kill copy-optionality: take away copyright in the current model and the value of this option is "given away" entirely to buyers. Producers of course seek to retain the entirety of this value.
The digital goods market is a different model than we've seen, but it's certainly not a doomsday scenario for digital content sellers, and it will stabilize, and the social mores will come to accept whatever it becomes. How will the sellers try to compensate for exactly what is being sold to buyers? First, by making the option (copying) difficult to exercise. But as this proves more difficult by technology I'm sure they'll get more inventive: after all, isn't ingenuity is driven by reward? (Or is it the possibility of reward?)
There is all this BS about every IP packet being traceable, but people have been researching anonymous P2P for a while now: eg, link. What's difficult about using proxies, multicast, and public/private key encryption to make the true users of a content-distribution network hard to identify? You might take a bandwidth hit, but the speed capability of networks hasn't gotten close to full potential.
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone else notice that, in this interview, they said $2.56 was binary 10,000,000, eg. a one followed by seven zeros?? I won't fall for it, I want my extra zero...
Will fingerprint security will need to be revised?
forgot http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2004/commentar y04092402.htm
There is a debate about whether granting stock options should be an expense on a company's balance sheet: One strong argument for expensing options is that while difficult to value, they nonetheless have value. Similarly, while a pirated digital copy might be easy to create and difficult to value, it certainly has value. Wealth can't come from nothing. Consequently, the value of an original digital good is determined not only by its physical attributes, but by the optionality that it could be copied down the road. This is distict from whether it actually is copied down the road - just like a stock option may never be exercised, and yet it has value today. The current situation is likely that digital good prices are higher (than non-digital) not just because of piracy, but because of the possibility of piracy, as this optionality is somewhat priced in. Governmental protection of copyright and the fear of its consequences keeps this additional price small. Indeed, their purpose is to kill copy-optionality: take away copyright in the current model and the value of this option is "given away" entirely to buyers. Producers of course seek to retain the entirety of this value. The digital goods market is a different model than we've seen, but it's certainly not a doomsday scenario for digital content sellers, and it will stabilize, and the social mores will come to accept whatever it becomes. How will the sellers try to compensate for exactly what is being sold to buyers? First, by making the option (copying) difficult to exercise. But as this proves more difficult by technology I'm sure they'll get more inventive: after all, isn't ingenuity is driven by reward? (Or is it the possibility of reward?)
Great 2-4 person puzzler game.
pop music is getting worse and worse... ;P
There is all this BS about every IP packet being traceable, but people have been researching anonymous P2P for a while now: eg, link. What's difficult about using proxies, multicast, and public/private key encryption to make the true users of a content-distribution network hard to identify? You might take a bandwidth hit, but the speed capability of networks hasn't gotten close to full potential.