Will they be able to tell when they get eaten in the food chain? We could end up eating a few of these when we eat tuna of some other fish in the ocean's food chain. I am more concerned abouot that, and the side effect of sending multiple signals through the ocean. We are not even complete sure sonar does mess with the the navigation of ocean creatures.
That there is no mention of how the current holder of the address would be handled? Would they get a chance to renew their contract? Or do they have to prepay to be on the waiting list? I can see these people doing the latter because it woul dgive them the most money. Either way, this idea doesn't sound good at all. We all one type of site that would be on almost every waiting list--p*rn.
Actually the free p*rn sites have been doing this for years! If this is true, then they are taking a page from the p*rn people. That is how they get people to go to specific sites. At least they haven't started sending you to the customers site.
Long ago before the world wide web was born and the internet was just an infant, we called this mob rule. This brings up the old movies where a mob wants to go and lynch somebody they _THINK_ has done something wrong. They want to do this without knowing all the information, and without just process. I am not sure I like this idea at all. This same type of co-operation is why so many people believed the world was flat. This could used as a tool to discredit valid options and opinions.
Through-out the article, the big companies are more worried about their money stream? The want to get paid for the copywrights they "own".
Copywrights are useless in today's society. It is time these companies realise that. People will pay for what they consider good, but if people think that they are paying too much, they will pirate the media (such as Napster).
For example, it is not way off the mark to assume that IF the HDTV movement hit mainstream, consumers will eventually be forced to to record their shows in a poorer quality than the original signal so as to protect the rights of the copywright holders. IF the media companies deems the consumer worthy, they might allow them to record the high quality media, but this will come at a cost. We might not be allowed to fast foward through commercials like most of us do when we record our favorites shows so we can actually watch them--this would probably be done with some type of modifications to the hardware &/or software. The other way they might do it is we "pay for the right" to record our shows and watch them at our convenience. There will be strings attached to this option too. Strings such as you can only watch the record x number of times and/or only on the original machine. Some of these options are being persued as we speak/read.
These companies are now abusing the copywright rights. It is time we dtop giving them the power to do so!!! The companies are no longer pursuing what the customer wants in entertainment and services. The companies are pursuing what will strengthen there bottomline! They will eventually learn that this will come back to haunt them. Consumers will eventually get fed up with being told what they can and cannot do! Consumers will then take actions like we saw with Napster--pirating! It will be virtually impossible to stop--mainly because the companies will only pursue legal means of stopping this new rise in piracy! They have, and will have, forgotten that the consumer's happiness is what sells there products.
Another step that will be taken by consumers at this upcoming time will be to return the legal purchased products, and cancel the legal purchased services. The consumers will then turn to pirated products and services!
All these companies need to get a wake up call. They simply _CANNOT_ control the market the way they are current tryig to do. The market has faught back, and will continue to fight back! THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE MUST LEARN TO COME OUT OF THERE CRYSTAL PALACES AND JOIN THE REAL WORLD!!!!! Consumers and the market will not tollerate this for long, and eventually not even the government will be able to help there industries. The market is a creature that cannot, and will not, be tamed. You can hold it for a short while, but the minute you turn your back, it will be on you like a wild animal and be out of your control!
One of the problems I see with this is getting the right equipment to be able to do these things. A case like the one talked about in the article will give support to those companies that don't want to provide their employee's with a good setup to prevent RSI injuries like CT. It might become difficult to get the setup you need to properly use a keyboard. I can't use a mouse that much any more. I have to use a touch pag which is easier on my hands and wrists.
I am lucky because my employer has seen fit to provide me with the setup I need. I don't have any where near as much pain as I have had in the past 2 years.
That can't be it. Wouldn't Crayola (sp?) have issues with that lawsuit. Crayon is a generic word in American English (I can't speak for other versions of te English language). That would be stupid if it is the real issue. This just reminds me why I dislike some lawyers.
We could still be worrying about this if we go through several Dark ages. Humanity as we know it might not even be around at all. We may have killed ourselves off before then.
They can go ahead and try that, but when people return the copy protected CDs is mass hords (like what was experienced by another Record company--I beleive it was BMI), they will sing a different tune. We need to stop protecting companies and let them fall and make the mistakes. We are protecting the companies so much now that they never end up going out of business. That used to be a way the market learned from it's mistakes, but big companies like these monster sized record companies, and other monster sized companies, get protection in the law and federal funds. The result on consumers is that these companies think they can force feed there desires into the mouths of customers even if they go broke. It is no longer about what the consumer wants! It is about what they tell the consumer they want!
Just because a gnome developer is taking it seriously doesn't mean it is good. There is a lot of money to be made down the road with the whole.NET setup (internet applications), but the trick will be to get people to buy into paying for somehting that doesn't reside on your computer.
As for C#, I am not going to bother. Microsoft lost it's java case against Sun and now it is acting like a spoiled little baby and releasing it's own technology. I don't know anyone interested in learning it--especially given Microsoft's track record with propritary technology. I doubt C# will ever be public domain.
Technically this was not the Supreme Court that tackled this. Eventually, this ruling could be overturned be the Supreme Court in a later ruling. I doubt the bok is closed on this one. This is only a small victory.
To some extent you can do that in Functional Programming. It all depends on how you design the functions. You can use 10 super functions to call a varing number of subfuntions the get futher specified as you go down.
As someone else pointed out, a mixture of functional and OOP is probably your best bet. This way you continue emphasis the best tool for the best job. OOP is just another methodolgy of writing programs. More will come along--such as aspect oriented programming. (Don't ask me the detail because I haven't had time to delve to deep into it yet, and for more information on that see AOSD.)
With each new methodology I learn, I add it to my belt of tools. I expect to keep on doing this. You never know when we will need to revert back to some older methodolgies--although I doubt I will go back to spaghetti code.
I don't like this layout. With the original triangular layout you could always find a triangle red Green and Blue. Using this layout you will not alway get blue next to green. I think this will show up in the final product.
A 70s/80s Buck Rogers in the 21st century ( I forget the exact title but the series appeared somewhere between 1973 and 198?) marathon. Then a Battle Star Galactica Marathon! ( I would even settle for Battlestar Galactica 1980 -- which I never saw).
Last year I watched all the Star Blazers series 3 Vidoes I had for New Years eve (I didn't have the whole series).
This year it might have to be all four DVDs of the Loduss War (the series & I probably spelled t wrong). It depends on if I can tolerate sitting infront of my Monitor that long! Now if I only didn't have to work a full day!
You still can't record a show using a tape like you can with a VHS tape. If you do, you lose the quality. Why should I pay for an HDTV that is not that great to begin with when I can't get recordings of the same quality!?! I rarely watch tv in real time. I just don't have the time. I record what I want to watch and watch when I can.
I recently went to look at the demos, and I wasn't impressed. The pictures were a little fuzy, and you need to be a mile away to see the picture clearly. What's the point of having high quality if you have to be so far away the screen is about the size of a 12 inch screen? (I am over exagerating a little but the point is still true.)
I will not buy an HDTV till I can go into Best Buy, AMES, or K-Mart to buy one because that will mean that the HDTVs have become more common, the cost will have gone down, there will be a decent way to record the signals like the VHS tapes, and the cost will have gone down.
I can think of pleny of other things I would like to spend my money on!
If the cds were available at a reasonable price, a price that the market considered reasonable (not the execs of some record industry or to marketing poeple), then piracy wouldn't be as high. The reason for this is because people would be able to afford to waste the amount of money to buy a crappy cd. The fact that piracy is increasing proves that the cost of cds is too high. If it was not too high, piracy would not be so abundant--piracy will always exist in some form. Regardless of the cost to produce a product (such as a cd) or market friction, the muisc industry is failing to take into account the clear market response. The market response in this case is increased piracy, and the response of the industry is to try and limit the use of the medium. That will not solve the problem--regardless if it is legal to circumvent the limitations. This battle will not be won by lawyers or conventional ecconomic logic and rules. The rules, and theories, need to be updated for the new millennium (and the information/internet age).
Most ecconics classes don't stress enough to the students that piracy increases the more you excede the cost the consumer is willing to pay. Most classes and books I have seen only say the consumer will not buy the product (or use the service). The market is proving this fact now because the consumer is _NOT_ buying the product. The consumer is _pirating_ the product. This means that while the consumer still wants the product (or service in other instances), the consumer is not willing to pay for the product (or service) at it's current price.
Given that Piracy will always exist, Piracy _WILL_ increase once the cost of the product, or service, exceeds the price the consumer is willing to pay.
Along these lines, the rise in sales of MP3 devices shows the consumers interest in a portable digital music player, but the industry is taking steps that will prevent the consumer for using these devices with the cds they have already purchased through legal methods. While this may just be a side effect of the companies trying to stop the piracy, this is hurting a new income stream for the industry as a whole. Again the music industry is failing to correctly analize the consumers responses and desires.
If Industries, Companies, and Associations do not adapt to these new market responses brought forth by the technology advances, they will eventually go out of business. You cannot run a business on pushing around the consumer for long. (Well, except Microsoft, but they have the technology aspect in clear view).
An increase in Piracy is a valid response in the market to the quality and/or cost of a product or service within the market. Companies need realise this and change their ideas of marketing and cost because the consumer is no longer willing to abstain from using a product, or service, simply because they view the cost as too much or the quality is poor. Companies need to realise this and start offering better products or lower cost because the market has spoken, and all the laws in the world will not stop it now!
So what?!?! Translaeted, that just mean's it took them that much longer to get something that only crashed every 30 days! I don't want to buy an embedded device that crashes!
Do you see XP on a watch? ( I should clarify this for you, XP on a watch as the OS of a small embedded device and not some promo with XP painted on it.) Linux has been put on a watch. IBM did it as a test of Linux's scalability, and they are teaming with another company to make a commercial version.
Actually, I don't listen to Britney Spears. That was an example of the Modern Pop Crap that is published today, but I feel the same way about a lot others such as Metalica and the rest of the rock group, and all rap is over priced.
I prefer the 80's stuff (including the 80's Metalica). Currently I am listening ot the LOTR soundtrack.
I have said it before, and I will say it again. The music companies just don't get it! If the music quality was better, maybe people wouldn't mind paying $16USD to $20USD per cd, but the music quality _SUCKS_. Let's face it, Britney Spears wouldn't have made it in the 80s (if she was her current age now back then). She'd have to dress conservatively.
If the music companies want to lower piracy, _LOWER_ _THE_ _PRICE_ _OF_ _THE_ _CDS_. (Maybe if it is in all caps any record execs reading this will actually wake up.) The increase in piracy can be directly related to the increase in cd prices (and the poor quality of the music--note the sound quality might be good, but that doesn't make the music good quality music!). If you want to stop the piracy lower the prices to $10 or less! The record compaies CANNOT win this fight. Piracy will continue and will only increase. File sharing is up since Napster tookit's hit. The Music Companies need go back to college and retake (or just take) economics 101!
To the Music Companies:
STOP FIGHTING THE PIRACY WITHYOUR LAWYERS AND TECHNOLOGISTS. START FIGHTING IT WITH ECONOMICS--LOWER THE PRICE.
One small problem. Not all software should require an upgrade. My father didn't get a new version of MS Office until he got a new computer. Not everybody can afford to purchase the latest version of software just because a company says it's great and the software license runs out. Facts of the matter are customer don't want to have to relearn stuff all that often.
With that said, I should say I understand not supporting older versions, but a 1 year or less life cycle for software? Some software is expensive, and companies should really consider keeping a few version alive to allow the customer to get some wear and tear on the product. I can understand killing older software if it's been more than 3 years and there have been _MAJOR_ changes to the software, but if it's only a couple of small minor things, the older software should stay alive.
If this trend keeps up, I think some of these companies will find that their customers will seek alternatives to their products. This could be good for the Open Source world if we get our act together. We'll need to be a little friendlier to nebies.
Slashdot Mirror
Will they be able to tell when they get eaten in the food chain? We could end up eating a few of these when we eat tuna of some other fish in the ocean's food chain. I am more concerned abouot that, and the side effect of sending multiple signals through the ocean. We are not even complete sure sonar does mess with the the navigation of ocean creatures.
I was planning on upgrading my C++ Builder, but now I won't. It wouldn't surprise me if this same licence appears in all their products.
That there is no mention of how the current holder of the address would be handled? Would they get a chance to renew their contract? Or do they have to prepay to be on the waiting list? I can see these people doing the latter because it woul dgive them the most money. Either way, this idea doesn't sound good at all. We all one type of site that would be on almost every waiting list--p*rn.
Actually the free p*rn sites have been doing this for years! If this is true, then they are taking a page from the p*rn people. That is how they get people to go to specific sites. At least they haven't started sending you to the customers site.
Long ago before the world wide web was born and the internet was just an infant, we called this mob rule. This brings up the old movies where a mob wants to go and lynch somebody they _THINK_ has done something wrong. They want to do this without knowing all the information, and without just process. I am not sure I like this idea at all. This same type of co-operation is why so many people believed the world was flat. This could used as a tool to discredit valid options and opinions.
Through-out the article, the big companies are more worried about their money stream? The want to get paid for the copywrights they "own".
Copywrights are useless in today's society. It is time these companies realise that. People will pay for what they consider good, but if people think that they are paying too much, they will pirate the media (such as Napster).
For example, it is not way off the mark to assume that IF the HDTV movement hit mainstream, consumers will eventually be forced to to record their shows in a poorer quality than the original signal so as to protect the rights of the copywright holders. IF the media companies deems the consumer worthy, they might allow them to record the high quality media, but this will come at a cost. We might not be allowed to fast foward through commercials like most of us do when we record our favorites shows so we can actually watch them--this would probably be done with some type of modifications to the hardware &/or software. The other way they might do it is we "pay for the right" to record our shows and watch them at our convenience. There will be strings attached to this option too. Strings such as you can only watch the record x number of times and/or only on the original machine. Some of these options are being persued as we speak/read.
These companies are now abusing the copywright rights. It is time we dtop giving them the power to do so!!! The companies are no longer pursuing what the customer wants in entertainment and services. The companies are pursuing what will strengthen there bottomline! They will eventually learn that this will come back to haunt them. Consumers will eventually get fed up with being told what they can and cannot do! Consumers will then take actions like we saw with Napster--pirating! It will be virtually impossible to stop--mainly because the companies will only pursue legal means of stopping this new rise in piracy! They have, and will have, forgotten that the consumer's happiness is what sells there products.
Another step that will be taken by consumers at this upcoming time will be to return the legal purchased products, and cancel the legal purchased services. The consumers will then turn to pirated products and services!
All these companies need to get a wake up call. They simply _CANNOT_ control the market the way they are current tryig to do. The market has faught back, and will continue to fight back! THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE MUST LEARN TO COME OUT OF THERE CRYSTAL PALACES AND JOIN THE REAL WORLD!!!!! Consumers and the market will not tollerate this for long, and eventually not even the government will be able to help there industries. The market is a creature that cannot, and will not, be tamed. You can hold it for a short while, but the minute you turn your back, it will be on you like a wild animal and be out of your control!
One of the problems I see with this is getting the right equipment to be able to do these things. A case like the one talked about in the article will give support to those companies that don't want to provide their employee's with a good setup to prevent RSI injuries like CT. It might become difficult to get the setup you need to properly use a keyboard. I can't use a mouse that much any more. I have to use a touch pag which is easier on my hands and wrists.
I am lucky because my employer has seen fit to provide me with the setup I need. I don't have any where near as much pain as I have had in the past 2 years.
That can't be it. Wouldn't Crayola (sp?) have issues with that lawsuit. Crayon is a generic word in American English (I can't speak for other versions of te English language). That would be stupid if it is the real issue. This just reminds me why I dislike some lawyers.
We could still be worrying about this if we go through several Dark ages. Humanity as we know it might not even be around at all. We may have killed ourselves off before then.
They can go ahead and try that, but when people return the copy protected CDs is mass hords (like what was experienced by another Record company--I beleive it was BMI), they will sing a different tune. We need to stop protecting companies and let them fall and make the mistakes. We are protecting the companies so much now that they never end up going out of business. That used to be a way the market learned from it's mistakes, but big companies like these monster sized record companies, and other monster sized companies, get protection in the law and federal funds. The result on consumers is that these companies think they can force feed there desires into the mouths of customers even if they go broke. It is no longer about what the consumer wants! It is about what they tell the consumer they want!
Just because a gnome developer is taking it seriously doesn't mean it is good. There is a lot of money to be made down the road with the whole .NET setup (internet applications), but the trick will be to get people to buy into paying for somehting that doesn't reside on your computer.
As for C#, I am not going to bother. Microsoft lost it's java case against Sun and now it is acting like a spoiled little baby and releasing it's own technology. I don't know anyone interested in learning it--especially given Microsoft's track record with propritary technology. I doubt C# will ever be public domain.
Technically this was not the Supreme Court that tackled this. Eventually, this ruling could be overturned be the Supreme Court in a later ruling. I doubt the bok is closed on this one. This is only a small victory.
The only problem with that idea is that things tend to get really worse before they get better.
To some extent you can do that in Functional Programming. It all depends on how you design the functions. You can use 10 super functions to call a varing number of subfuntions the get futher specified as you go down.
As someone else pointed out, a mixture of functional and OOP is probably your best bet. This way you continue emphasis the best tool for the best job. OOP is just another methodolgy of writing programs. More will come along--such as aspect oriented programming. (Don't ask me the detail because I haven't had time to delve to deep into it yet, and for more information on that see AOSD.)
With each new methodology I learn, I add it to my belt of tools. I expect to keep on doing this. You never know when we will need to revert back to some older methodolgies--although I doubt I will go back to spaghetti code.
I looks like the VP doesn't know how to prrof read his important emails:
"I know what out customers share with us is in confidence that we will keep it internal."
It's one thing when post a comment, but an official company email?
I don't like this layout. With the original triangular layout you could always find a triangle red Green and Blue. Using this layout you will not alway get blue next to green. I think this will show up in the final product.
A 70s/80s Buck Rogers in the 21st century ( I forget the exact title but the series appeared somewhere between 1973 and 198?) marathon. Then a Battle Star Galactica Marathon! ( I would even settle for Battlestar Galactica 1980 -- which I never saw).
Last year I watched all the Star Blazers series 3 Vidoes I had for New Years eve (I didn't have the whole series).
This year it might have to be all four DVDs of the Loduss War (the series & I probably spelled t wrong). It depends on if I can tolerate sitting infront of my Monitor that long! Now if I only didn't have to work a full day!
You still can't record a show using a tape like you can with a VHS tape. If you do, you lose the quality. Why should I pay for an HDTV that is not that great to begin with when I can't get recordings of the same quality!?! I rarely watch tv in real time. I just don't have the time. I record what I want to watch and watch when I can.
I recently went to look at the demos, and I wasn't impressed. The pictures were a little fuzy, and you need to be a mile away to see the picture clearly. What's the point of having high quality if you have to be so far away the screen is about the size of a 12 inch screen? (I am over exagerating a little but the point is still true.)
I will not buy an HDTV till I can go into Best Buy, AMES, or K-Mart to buy one because that will mean that the HDTVs have become more common, the cost will have gone down, there will be a decent way to record the signals like the VHS tapes, and the cost will have gone down.
I can think of pleny of other things I would like to spend my money on!
Scuba Diving anyone? Maybe on Neptune? I have a great price on the trip, hotel, and gear!
If the cds were available at a reasonable price, a price that the market considered reasonable (not the execs of some record industry or to marketing poeple), then piracy wouldn't be as high. The reason for this is because people would be able to afford to waste the amount of money to buy a crappy cd. The fact that piracy is increasing proves that the cost of cds is too high. If it was not too high, piracy would not be so abundant--piracy will always exist in some form. Regardless of the cost to produce a product (such as a cd) or market friction, the muisc industry is failing to take into account the clear market response. The market response in this case is increased piracy, and the response of the industry is to try and limit the use of the medium. That will not solve the problem--regardless if it is legal to circumvent the limitations. This battle will not be won by lawyers or conventional ecconomic logic and rules. The rules, and theories, need to be updated for the new millennium (and the information/internet age).
Most ecconics classes don't stress enough to the students that piracy increases the more you excede the cost the consumer is willing to pay. Most classes and books I have seen only say the consumer will not buy the product (or use the service). The market is proving this fact now because the consumer is _NOT_ buying the product. The consumer is _pirating_ the product. This means that while the consumer still wants the product (or service in other instances), the consumer is not willing to pay for the product (or service) at it's current price.
Given that Piracy will always exist, Piracy _WILL_ increase once the cost of the product, or service, exceeds the price the consumer is willing to pay.
Along these lines, the rise in sales of MP3 devices shows the consumers interest in a portable digital music player, but the industry is taking steps that will prevent the consumer for using these devices with the cds they have already purchased through legal methods. While this may just be a side effect of the companies trying to stop the piracy, this is hurting a new income stream for the industry as a whole. Again the music industry is failing to correctly analize the consumers responses and desires.
If Industries, Companies, and Associations do not adapt to these new market responses brought forth by the technology advances, they will eventually go out of business. You cannot run a business on pushing around the consumer for long. (Well, except Microsoft, but they have the technology aspect in clear view).
An increase in Piracy is a valid response in the market to the quality and/or cost of a product or service within the market. Companies need realise this and change their ideas of marketing and cost because the consumer is no longer willing to abstain from using a product, or service, simply because they view the cost as too much or the quality is poor. Companies need to realise this and start offering better products or lower cost because the market has spoken, and all the laws in the world will not stop it now!
So what?!?! Translaeted, that just mean's it took them that much longer to get something that only crashed every 30 days! I don't want to buy an embedded device that crashes!
Do you see XP on a watch? ( I should clarify this for you, XP on a watch as the OS of a small embedded device and not some promo with XP painted on it.) Linux has been put on a watch. IBM did it as a test of Linux's scalability, and they are teaming with another company to make a commercial version.
Actually, I don't listen to Britney Spears. That was an example of the Modern Pop Crap that is published today, but I feel the same way about a lot others such as Metalica and the rest of the rock group, and all rap is over priced.
I prefer the 80's stuff (including the 80's Metalica). Currently I am listening ot the LOTR soundtrack.
I am skeptical aboutthat claim. Something is needed to read and write to the drive. Plaus the line at the bottom of one of the pages:
"* Windows 98 Drivers will be available for download"
My guess is that it may use an exhisting driver, or the package you buy has one.
I have said it before, and I will say it again. The music companies just don't get it! If the music quality was better, maybe people wouldn't mind paying $16USD to $20USD per cd, but the music quality _SUCKS_. Let's face it, Britney Spears wouldn't have made it in the 80s (if she was her current age now back then). She'd have to dress conservatively.
If the music companies want to lower piracy, _LOWER_ _THE_ _PRICE_ _OF_ _THE_ _CDS_. (Maybe if it is in all caps any record execs reading this will actually wake up.) The increase in piracy can be directly related to the increase in cd prices (and the poor quality of the music--note the sound quality might be good, but that doesn't make the music good quality music!). If you want to stop the piracy lower the prices to $10 or less! The record compaies CANNOT win this fight. Piracy will continue and will only increase. File sharing is up since Napster tookit's hit. The Music Companies need go back to college and retake (or just take) economics 101!
To the Music Companies:
STOP FIGHTING THE PIRACY WITHYOUR LAWYERS AND TECHNOLOGISTS. START FIGHTING IT WITH ECONOMICS--LOWER THE PRICE.
One small problem. Not all software should require an upgrade. My father didn't get a new version of MS Office until he got a new computer. Not everybody can afford to purchase the latest version of software just because a company says it's great and the software license runs out. Facts of the matter are customer don't want to have to relearn stuff all that often.
With that said, I should say I understand not supporting older versions, but a 1 year or less life cycle for software? Some software is expensive, and companies should really consider keeping a few version alive to allow the customer to get some wear and tear on the product. I can understand killing older software if it's been more than 3 years and there have been _MAJOR_ changes to the software, but if it's only a couple of small minor things, the older software should stay alive.
If this trend keeps up, I think some of these companies will find that their customers will seek alternatives to their products. This could be good for the Open Source world if we get our act together. We'll need to be a little friendlier to nebies.