I don't think it's five for $3.99, but rather, there are five films that will be the first released for rental via YouTube and each of the five will have a rental price of $3.99.
I don't think the "bang for your buck" argument is silly because it's an incredibly common fallacy that no doubt affects the people making the decisions as well. The fact that it's fallacious makes it no less a motivating factor for those who control our money.
The thing that bothers me about the interview is that he says he's limiting access to information to artificially lower supply and induce demand; but that's not what they're doing. The information is still out there. Anyone who wants to give the information to someone other than wikileaks is able to do so. It's not "their" information to control or limit.
What they can and do control is the service that they provide -- namely: checking, collating, and hosting the information. I think it's an important distinction that needs to be made, though it may be semantics.
On the other hand, I wonder if there were as many toxic chemicals and metals being used so casually when you were a kid. It's not like China was a major industrial power then.
If I were a parent and I had read this article, it would probably scare me shitless. What would you do to protect your children from these kinds of threats -- the ones you don't even know enough about to keep an eye out for? Even if you did know about this threat, how would you make sure that jewelry didn't contain cadmium? It's not like there's a "nutrition facts" sticker for jewelry and toys.
As one poster said, you could try to refrain from buying items made in China, since that's where the majority of the problems come from, but what else can you do? So much stuff is made in China nowadays that it seems pretty hard to not get those things for your kids, or have them get them from other people.
Google could make some money here, I think. This is a chance to implement a "Google Verified" or "Google Trusted" program where any developer can submit their application to Google, along with a processing fee, for the vetting process that would check their application; if it passes, they could get a small badge and a searchable tag. People would then have the option to either download only verified applications or whatever they wanted. I imagine that financial applications or those that handle serious amounts of personal data would want to go for the vetting process.
Perhaps it would be useful for something that doesn't require a lot of transitions in a short time. A few of the things I can think of are picture frames, advertisements/billboards, signs/menus on walls, digital clocks... those big informative posters I used to see in elementary school that were changed out every week.
This is exactly why gun manufacturers and gun stores are sued every time a crime is committed with a gun. Or why Dell is sued every time someone uses a Dell laptop in a crime.
I think the problem here is that I'm ultimately more of a pragmatist. Yes, the airlines are being retarded, and yes, I think they should stop being retarded, but no, I don't think working for an airline is "supporting evil." I don't think they're evil because they're being stupid, either. I mean, frankly, you'd be hard-pressed to work for any kind of company that's not doing "evil" if your standards are going to be that loose to begin with.
So it's evil to quit a job working for a large company that gives you an okay pay and benefits that help support your two children, but it's commendable to quit that job because you want to protest the company's actions even though you won't be able to provide for your children? I mean, given today's economy, it would be hard to find another job.
How is it clear that this is where publishing is headed? This makes no sense at all to me.
Booksurge allows for smaller runs of books with authors running their own publicity -- the only person I can think of who has done this successfully is Wil Wheaton, who had a leg up in the form of childhood fame. What it does not give you is an established infrastructure for support, connections with other publishers/countries, advances, editorial advice, and additional contracts/advertising. These are all things that I would imagine are very, very useful for writers.
For readers, traditional publishing houses offer filters in the form of editors and the people who read the slush pile. When you buy a book from a large publishing house like Tor, Penguin, or Macmillan, you can expect a certain level of quality in the writing. This isn't say that all of their books are good or will fit your tastes, but there's a certain standard that the editors at those houses will try to adhere to; it's how they stay in business.
To use a car analogy, a traditional publishing house is like a dealership that sells only new Hyundais; you might not like everything or the prices, but you can expect a certain standard. A self-publisher like Booksurge would be more like a dealership that specializes in selling cars built from the ground-up, or kit cars... by hobbyists. Sure, some people may know what they're doing and you'll get an amazing car, but a lot of them will probably be crap.
That's the "if you're a moral person you don't need to be practical" cop-out. At the end of the day, you're going to care about providing for yourself, your children, or your parents more than you care about being a drop in the pond for some "moral" effort that you'll probably never see the effects of. I mean, are you looking into every single product you wear or use and refusing to buy the ones that have negative impacts on other people? I doubt it. Most people don't. A soapbox is nice, but some people would rather have the soap inside than your nice speech.
I think it would sell well here in Japan, where it's not uncommon to see people on scooters and small motorcycles in smaller cities and rural areas. I've seen uglier ones around here too, though fashion-conscious people might balk at buying it. It could also be a popular bike if it had a spring-loaded rack on the back for deliveries...
Japan Post uses tons of motorcycles for its mailmen -- perhaps they would be a good market as well.
It would be interesting if these "glitter cells" could be suspended in some kind of "paint" or perhaps embedded in a capacitative tile. The paint especially would have a lot of interesting uses -- cover your car, for example.
I'd really be interested in seeing if this could safely be used inside the body somehow. You could use it to power pacemakers. More relevant to my own interests, it could possibly power an internal assembly for a cochlear implant processor. It would be nice to get rid of all of the external bits so I could run, jump, swim, and wear hats normally.
I guess a situation like this makes you stop and realize why Apple institutes such draconian controls on its hardware/software. Anything wrong with any "Google phone" reflects badly on Google, regardless of whether it's their fault or not. After all, people like us who read these kinds of articles and have some idea of what Google can and cannot do will understand that it's not entirely Google's fault... but for other people, it spoils the brand.
I never said it doesn't have kanji support; the interface is just less-suited to the Japanese language than a normal cell phone. Most people don't want to sit around drawing kanji, anyway.
You enabled emoji with an application. Normal Japanese phones come with tons of emoji and kaomoji, no applications required. I don't think most people want to have to go around downloading applications for things they take for granted.
The smartphone market here is absolutely miniscule. I'm not sure what anyone would gain from getting a smartphone in Japan since the normal Japanese cell phone already has more features than the standard American smartphone, excepting support for corporate policies and the like. The Japanese language works very well on a numeric keypad; there's absolutely no reason to use a keyboard, which is one of the draws of a smartphone. Japanese phones all have dedicated application stores/game sites as well, so that's not a factor either. Streaming video, youtube support, nicodouga support... all there.
What the iPhone does offer (in addition to a nice UI and experience) is a fashion factor, I think. It looks neat, the case is cool, it's relatively unique, and it's "branded." In some small way, it's like LV or any other brand; there are people who want it for the brand.
This is just anecdotal, but I personally know three Japanese people who have iPhones. They all got them because it looked neat and was essentially free. Of those three, one of them loves it, one of them has gone back to her original phone because the iPhone is much harder to write e-mail on, and the last, an American, uses it grudgingly because he can't go back (switched companies for the iPhone). Why does he dislike it? It's missing a lot of basic things that you can expect on a good cell phone: good dictionary support, kanji lookup, kaomoji/emoji support, and a useful texting interface.
There's no way I'd trade my phone for the iPhone, personally. The odd thing is, my phone (au's SH003) is apparently an attempt to steal some of the iPhone's touch thunder -- it's got a normal form factor but the screen is also touch-capable... not that I use it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it's five for $3.99, but rather, there are five films that will be the first released for rental via YouTube and each of the five will have a rental price of $3.99.
If there's anything to be believed here, I wonder if RLS makes any difference.
I don't think the "bang for your buck" argument is silly because it's an incredibly common fallacy that no doubt affects the people making the decisions as well. The fact that it's fallacious makes it no less a motivating factor for those who control our money.
The thing that bothers me about the interview is that he says he's limiting access to information to artificially lower supply and induce demand; but that's not what they're doing. The information is still out there. Anyone who wants to give the information to someone other than wikileaks is able to do so. It's not "their" information to control or limit.
What they can and do control is the service that they provide -- namely: checking, collating, and hosting the information. I think it's an important distinction that needs to be made, though it may be semantics.
On the other hand, I wonder if there were as many toxic chemicals and metals being used so casually when you were a kid. It's not like China was a major industrial power then.
If I were a parent and I had read this article, it would probably scare me shitless. What would you do to protect your children from these kinds of threats -- the ones you don't even know enough about to keep an eye out for? Even if you did know about this threat, how would you make sure that jewelry didn't contain cadmium? It's not like there's a "nutrition facts" sticker for jewelry and toys.
As one poster said, you could try to refrain from buying items made in China, since that's where the majority of the problems come from, but what else can you do? So much stuff is made in China nowadays that it seems pretty hard to not get those things for your kids, or have them get them from other people.
Google could make some money here, I think. This is a chance to implement a "Google Verified" or "Google Trusted" program where any developer can submit their application to Google, along with a processing fee, for the vetting process that would check their application; if it passes, they could get a small badge and a searchable tag. People would then have the option to either download only verified applications or whatever they wanted. I imagine that financial applications or those that handle serious amounts of personal data would want to go for the vetting process.
Perhaps it would be useful for something that doesn't require a lot of transitions in a short time. A few of the things I can think of are picture frames, advertisements/billboards, signs/menus on walls, digital clocks... those big informative posters I used to see in elementary school that were changed out every week.
Nuclear reactor training?
The internet and the undernet.
This is exactly why gun manufacturers and gun stores are sued every time a crime is committed with a gun. Or why Dell is sued every time someone uses a Dell laptop in a crime.
The Sidekick seems like it would be a shoo-in for this kind of thing. It has a trackball and a qwerty keypad. I always preferred it to the iPhone...
Make XP look like 98 look like Ubuntu look like 95!
I think the problem here is that I'm ultimately more of a pragmatist. Yes, the airlines are being retarded, and yes, I think they should stop being retarded, but no, I don't think working for an airline is "supporting evil." I don't think they're evil because they're being stupid, either. I mean, frankly, you'd be hard-pressed to work for any kind of company that's not doing "evil" if your standards are going to be that loose to begin with.
So it's evil to quit a job working for a large company that gives you an okay pay and benefits that help support your two children, but it's commendable to quit that job because you want to protest the company's actions even though you won't be able to provide for your children? I mean, given today's economy, it would be hard to find another job.
How is it clear that this is where publishing is headed? This makes no sense at all to me.
Booksurge allows for smaller runs of books with authors running their own publicity -- the only person I can think of who has done this successfully is Wil Wheaton, who had a leg up in the form of childhood fame. What it does not give you is an established infrastructure for support, connections with other publishers/countries, advances, editorial advice, and additional contracts/advertising. These are all things that I would imagine are very, very useful for writers.
For readers, traditional publishing houses offer filters in the form of editors and the people who read the slush pile. When you buy a book from a large publishing house like Tor, Penguin, or Macmillan, you can expect a certain level of quality in the writing. This isn't say that all of their books are good or will fit your tastes, but there's a certain standard that the editors at those houses will try to adhere to; it's how they stay in business.
To use a car analogy, a traditional publishing house is like a dealership that sells only new Hyundais; you might not like everything or the prices, but you can expect a certain standard. A self-publisher like Booksurge would be more like a dealership that specializes in selling cars built from the ground-up, or kit cars... by hobbyists. Sure, some people may know what they're doing and you'll get an amazing car, but a lot of them will probably be crap.
That's the "if you're a moral person you don't need to be practical" cop-out. At the end of the day, you're going to care about providing for yourself, your children, or your parents more than you care about being a drop in the pond for some "moral" effort that you'll probably never see the effects of. I mean, are you looking into every single product you wear or use and refusing to buy the ones that have negative impacts on other people? I doubt it. Most people don't. A soapbox is nice, but some people would rather have the soap inside than your nice speech.
I think it would sell well here in Japan, where it's not uncommon to see people on scooters and small motorcycles in smaller cities and rural areas. I've seen uglier ones around here too, though fashion-conscious people might balk at buying it. It could also be a popular bike if it had a spring-loaded rack on the back for deliveries...
Japan Post uses tons of motorcycles for its mailmen -- perhaps they would be a good market as well.
It would be interesting if these "glitter cells" could be suspended in some kind of "paint" or perhaps embedded in a capacitative tile. The paint especially would have a lot of interesting uses -- cover your car, for example.
I'd really be interested in seeing if this could safely be used inside the body somehow. You could use it to power pacemakers. More relevant to my own interests, it could possibly power an internal assembly for a cochlear implant processor. It would be nice to get rid of all of the external bits so I could run, jump, swim, and wear hats normally.
Precedential... or Presidential? Ha!
I don't either, but I'm surrounded by people who do, which makes it a problem for me. I'd imagine you're in the same situation.
I guess a situation like this makes you stop and realize why Apple institutes such draconian controls on its hardware/software. Anything wrong with any "Google phone" reflects badly on Google, regardless of whether it's their fault or not. After all, people like us who read these kinds of articles and have some idea of what Google can and cannot do will understand that it's not entirely Google's fault... but for other people, it spoils the brand.
I never said it doesn't have kanji support; the interface is just less-suited to the Japanese language than a normal cell phone. Most people don't want to sit around drawing kanji, anyway.
You enabled emoji with an application. Normal Japanese phones come with tons of emoji and kaomoji, no applications required. I don't think most people want to have to go around downloading applications for things they take for granted.
The smartphone market here is absolutely miniscule. I'm not sure what anyone would gain from getting a smartphone in Japan since the normal Japanese cell phone already has more features than the standard American smartphone, excepting support for corporate policies and the like. The Japanese language works very well on a numeric keypad; there's absolutely no reason to use a keyboard, which is one of the draws of a smartphone. Japanese phones all have dedicated application stores/game sites as well, so that's not a factor either. Streaming video, youtube support, nicodouga support... all there.
What the iPhone does offer (in addition to a nice UI and experience) is a fashion factor, I think. It looks neat, the case is cool, it's relatively unique, and it's "branded." In some small way, it's like LV or any other brand; there are people who want it for the brand.
This is just anecdotal, but I personally know three Japanese people who have iPhones. They all got them because it looked neat and was essentially free. Of those three, one of them loves it, one of them has gone back to her original phone because the iPhone is much harder to write e-mail on, and the last, an American, uses it grudgingly because he can't go back (switched companies for the iPhone). Why does he dislike it? It's missing a lot of basic things that you can expect on a good cell phone: good dictionary support, kanji lookup, kaomoji/emoji support, and a useful texting interface.
There's no way I'd trade my phone for the iPhone, personally. The odd thing is, my phone (au's SH003) is apparently an attempt to steal some of the iPhone's touch thunder -- it's got a normal form factor but the screen is also touch-capable... not that I use it.