No, it doesn't make any sense. Because it would be much cheaper to make the original iPhone with a few features disabled or components not included than do an entire new design, testing, RF certification, ect of a new model for a single market.
We can let our children worry about the mess of SDTVs *and* Receiver boxes.
Isn't this how we got into the environmental pickles we're already in? Rather than deal with issues when we first become aware, we blow it off and let "the next generation" deal with it. They in turn do the same thing, and so on, and so on, until the issue is beyond the point of fixing.
Also, Microsoft is not the support provider for your OS. Microsoft has training programs, they train retailers, so whoever sold you the computer is your end user support. Only when you have a Serious Problem and its Serious Business does Microsoft act as support.
Viacom had to cave eventually. They can't win this battle too easily. I'm sure TWC made a few concessions, but they win this one easily I'd guess.
I think this is interesting in you really can't tell who has who by the balls.
My first reaction is Viacom has the upper hand. Nobody subscribes to cable TV to watch the carrier signal. No content means no customers, and Viacom was holding enough of the big channels that cable would be useless to most people without them. But then, with cable companies holding monopolies so often, cutting off Time-Warner means Viacom cutting themselves off from those markets for viewers.
If there were more cable companies available it wouldn't be an issue for Viacom. The customers would shift to the companies they were still carried on, and that would give Viacom extra leverage against those other companies at contract renewal, too. But here it's play ball or take what they can get from satellite subscribers, and the way smaller cablecos keep getting swallowed up by Cox, Time-Warner, and Comcast only makes it worse.
The New York Times reports that the soon-to-be-disbanded Bush / Cheney White House threatens to overload the National Archives with close to 100 Terabytes of data
Does anyone else find it ironic this is the same administration that couldn't keep track of a few years worth of official emails? I seem to remember a lack of storage space being one of the excuses, too.
Apart from that, the Communications act 1996 required that set-top boxes be freely available for consumers to purchase to prevent this sort of thing.
It did. The problem is they don't force the cablecos themselves to offer them.
Any company that wants to make digital cable boxes can sell them to the public. But cable systems are generally only made to work with a certain company's cable boxes (Scientific Atlanta or Motorola). So if neither of those two companies make their boxes available direct to consumes, it does no good. Also, another reason companies don't offer direct to consumers is support. Few companies want to deal with end users on supporting the equipment, a cost cablecos pick up right now. The box manufacturer isn't going to have the information needed to tell if the problem is a box issue or a cable signal issue generally. They also don't have the ability to send out authorization/reset signals over the cableco's network.
You'll get the same issue people with third-party VoIP service have now support-wise: It's far too easy for both companies involved to point to the other one and say the problem is theirs. And they both can claim they can't support the issue due to the service being dependent on the other's product. So you have a situation where literally no one is responsible if things don't work.
'Will VHS be missed? Not... with videos being brittle, clunky, and rather user-unfriendly...
I'll remember that next time a rental DVD jumps back to the menu screen after hitting a scratch halfway through the film it can't read past, or when I'm forced to wait through ten minutes of promos before the film because I can't fast forward through them anymore.
Some of that is for support reasons. I now am supposed to tell people that passwords can only be lowercase letters and numbers, they can use uppercase latters, and they can use special characters, but I'm supposed to give the impression they can't. Because people are more likely to forget what special characters they used or which letters were capitalized than what the letters themselves were, then they call in and swear up and down they're using the right password and the site's not letting them in. It's just easier if they don't have an excuse to be pushing the shift key at any point.
Despite these limitations, it's amazing how many people will try to use something easy to guess for their password. The password can be as few as three characters, but I tell them it has to be at least six, otherwise half of them try to use '1234' or the last four of their social security number. If I don't tell them they have to use both letters AND numbers a bunch more will try to use a child's name. I even claim the system will not allow characters similar to their account information just to keep some from using the username as the password or own last name. This is just for an email server. But through email you can get Paypal and eBay access or other stuff reset if you have additional info on the person.
You *do* realize that all of those banks allow an attacker to access your account without the keyfob, right? They just need to call the bank, impersonate you (often by simply using the password they keylogged in the first place) and claim they lost it (or just use the automated phone service at most banks, which accepts your password without the added key).
This seems to be what happens when any business tries to implement any sort of account security. It has to be made so it can be easily bypassed, or you end up with customers mad at the company because they locked themselves or relatives/family out and the company wont allow them to simply go through on their word they are authorized. It's like they don't know how to see how it looks from the company's point of view.
Build a better lock, and they'll build a better idiot.
I agree entirely with that. However, if the author hasn't made this book available via digital distribution, then what gives us the ethical right to override that decision and download an infringing copy to avoid paying for it, given that the book is readily and legally available?
You're assuming we were going to buy a copy to begin with, the very same false logic the RIAA/MPAA uses.
A few months ago I began reading a well-known series of fantasy novels that started publishing in the 80's. The books are not out of print and readily available at a book store less than three blocks from where I'm reading them actually.
There are more than 10 books in this series and I'm reading them via torrented PDFs. I'm reading them as PDFs because its more convenient for the setting I'm reading in. But if those torrents were not available, would I be buying copies of the books? No. I would go three blocks in a different direction from where I'm reading to the public library and check them out. So the publisher nor the author would be making any more money from me reading the stories on paper either. In fact, the creator would gain nothing even if I did go buy then, he's been dead for a few years now. Which is another reason I'm not too concerned about lost profits now.
Perhaps he was concerned about earning a living when he was still on this Earth, but if that author is still in a form where he can look down on the world now (if you beleive in that sort of thing), I think he would be more satisfied to see people are still enjoying his stories and not really concerned about any material gain his publishers are making.
Why is up to YOU to decide that if you don't like the party that will profit (from the author/publishers) decision, that you can override it?
Because I am the end user. I am the consumer. As much as the content creators like to think they are in control of the value of the product because they stick the price tag on it, it is still the public that decides the real value of goods and services.
In the case of this book, the story is the author's. He's not here for me to send a few bucks too. The rest is non-existant. Was I drawn to this series by a flashy ad or store display? No. So there were no advertising costs. Am I reading a book printed on nice paper with a hardback cover? No. In fact, there is no physical book at all! No printing costs then. Some poor soul with a crapload of time on his hands scanned and OCRed a copy on his own time and added PDF bookmarks at the chapter marks. Maybe I should send a buck to him since he's the one who labored over the production here? The book's publisher sure isn't paying anyone's ISP bill so they did incur any distribution costs for this PDF.
Really. Besides the value of the story itself, who do you think deserves to get paid and how much to they deserve considering what their actual contributions to this PDF file were?
I just find it hilarious these are the result of using a processor that is just now being released on what is considered too low a resolution by today's standards anyway.
If you can afford a system with a Core i7 processor, having a decent graphics card will not be a concern to you.
2. We shouldn't have to buy books on the used market just to keep someone from starving. If the used book selling business is obsolete thanks to digital distribution, those people need to get new jobs.
Nobody thought people should ride horses instead of cars to keep the blacksmith in business.
But darn it; when will someone finally offer a reasonably-priced, open-platform STB that serves as an A/V gateway to multiple Internet-based services -- one consumer-friendly, environmentally-designed, low-power gadget 'to rule them all,' if you will."
I would say "never".
Any attempt that would satisfy the DRM-requirements for a service to sign off on working with it would not be considered "open" enough by the Free Software fanatics.
Why don't you ask for a CableCard system for MythTV while you're at it? LOL.
The patent describes a device for accepting credit card payments at the table of the patron, allowing them to pick their amounts paid, and therefore saving the patrons and the waitrons from the hassle of communicating all this back and forth and dealing with the subsequent mistakes.
If the waitstaff can't do simple math I don't want them tabulating a bill for me to begin with.
I figured they were talking about the murder of the, erm, oldest people in Germany living in this current age... So I clicked through out of curiousity, wondering what it might have to do with technology.
Blah, that's better than me. I was expecting to read about the recent grizzly murder of a family of an elderly couple in their 90's and their seventy-something year old children who were still living with them (but no spouses for the children or third generation). In other words, the family that met the conditions of a nuclear family with the oldest members.
As an engineering student, I think this idea is impractical. When I'm preparing for a midterm, I'm usually burning through practice problems at the end of each chapter. The ability to glance at the last few pages of the book (physically) to check my answer, or to flip back a few pages to reread a concept is invaluable. I'm sure I would get annoyed rather quickly with the electronic equivalent.
If you have to turn pages one at a time, yeah. But the e-paper version of you textbook could just have a link that takes you straight to the answer or to the section of the book the problem deals with. That would be slightly handier than having to keep a finger or something marking multiple points in a paper textbook. Actually, it's not like an e-ink reader even has to follow the constraints of how a paper book works. It could just as easily show you all three pages at once on different parts of the screen. Try doing that with your standard textbook without taking the binding apart.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it doesn't make any sense. Because it would be much cheaper to make the original iPhone with a few features disabled or components not included than do an entire new design, testing, RF certification, ect of a new model for a single market.
In Soviet Russia, games plays without YOU.
Isn't this how we got into the environmental pickles we're already in? Rather than deal with issues when we first become aware, we blow it off and let "the next generation" deal with it. They in turn do the same thing, and so on, and so on, until the issue is beyond the point of fixing.
I would ask for clarification on that point, but otherwise I don't see anything "troll" here.
Maybe you need to go back and read the article summary again.
When they don't even try powering down or rebooting anything before calling you, and that's all it takes to solve their problem?
Yeah, that's just not trying then.
Even when you buy a boxed retail copy?
I think this is interesting in you really can't tell who has who by the balls.
My first reaction is Viacom has the upper hand. Nobody subscribes to cable TV to watch the carrier signal. No content means no customers, and Viacom was holding enough of the big channels that cable would be useless to most people without them. But then, with cable companies holding monopolies so often, cutting off Time-Warner means Viacom cutting themselves off from those markets for viewers.
If there were more cable companies available it wouldn't be an issue for Viacom. The customers would shift to the companies they were still carried on, and that would give Viacom extra leverage against those other companies at contract renewal, too. But here it's play ball or take what they can get from satellite subscribers, and the way smaller cablecos keep getting swallowed up by Cox, Time-Warner, and Comcast only makes it worse.
Does anyone else find it ironic this is the same administration that couldn't keep track of a few years worth of official emails? I seem to remember a lack of storage space being one of the excuses, too.
It did. The problem is they don't force the cablecos themselves to offer them.
Any company that wants to make digital cable boxes can sell them to the public. But cable systems are generally only made to work with a certain company's cable boxes (Scientific Atlanta or Motorola). So if neither of those two companies make their boxes available direct to consumes, it does no good. Also, another reason companies don't offer direct to consumers is support. Few companies want to deal with end users on supporting the equipment, a cost cablecos pick up right now. The box manufacturer isn't going to have the information needed to tell if the problem is a box issue or a cable signal issue generally. They also don't have the ability to send out authorization/reset signals over the cableco's network.
You'll get the same issue people with third-party VoIP service have now support-wise: It's far too easy for both companies involved to point to the other one and say the problem is theirs. And they both can claim they can't support the issue due to the service being dependent on the other's product. So you have a situation where literally no one is responsible if things don't work.
I'll remember that next time a rental DVD jumps back to the menu screen after hitting a scratch halfway through the film it can't read past, or when I'm forced to wait through ten minutes of promos before the film because I can't fast forward through them anymore.
Become celibate?
You call that a Vista feature? It works with any app pinned to my start menu on XP.
(1) Press "Windows" key on keyboard to bring up start menu.
(2) Press N (first letter of "notepad")
(3) Press Enter
But it was on Slashdot, didn't you see the article and long discussion for of insightful posts about how to counteract it?
Oh, wait...
Some of that is for support reasons. I now am supposed to tell people that passwords can only be lowercase letters and numbers, they can use uppercase latters, and they can use special characters, but I'm supposed to give the impression they can't. Because people are more likely to forget what special characters they used or which letters were capitalized than what the letters themselves were, then they call in and swear up and down they're using the right password and the site's not letting them in. It's just easier if they don't have an excuse to be pushing the shift key at any point.
Despite these limitations, it's amazing how many people will try to use something easy to guess for their password. The password can be as few as three characters, but I tell them it has to be at least six, otherwise half of them try to use '1234' or the last four of their social security number. If I don't tell them they have to use both letters AND numbers a bunch more will try to use a child's name. I even claim the system will not allow characters similar to their account information just to keep some from using the username as the password or own last name. This is just for an email server. But through email you can get Paypal and eBay access or other stuff reset if you have additional info on the person.
This seems to be what happens when any business tries to implement any sort of account security. It has to be made so it can be easily bypassed, or you end up with customers mad at the company because they locked themselves or relatives/family out and the company wont allow them to simply go through on their word they are authorized. It's like they don't know how to see how it looks from the company's point of view.
Build a better lock, and they'll build a better idiot.
Nono! SimDemocracy.
You're assuming we were going to buy a copy to begin with, the very same false logic the RIAA/MPAA uses.
A few months ago I began reading a well-known series of fantasy novels that started publishing in the 80's. The books are not out of print and readily available at a book store less than three blocks from where I'm reading them actually.
There are more than 10 books in this series and I'm reading them via torrented PDFs. I'm reading them as PDFs because its more convenient for the setting I'm reading in. But if those torrents were not available, would I be buying copies of the books? No. I would go three blocks in a different direction from where I'm reading to the public library and check them out. So the publisher nor the author would be making any more money from me reading the stories on paper either. In fact, the creator would gain nothing even if I did go buy then, he's been dead for a few years now. Which is another reason I'm not too concerned about lost profits now.
Perhaps he was concerned about earning a living when he was still on this Earth, but if that author is still in a form where he can look down on the world now (if you beleive in that sort of thing), I think he would be more satisfied to see people are still enjoying his stories and not really concerned about any material gain his publishers are making.
Because I am the end user. I am the consumer. As much as the content creators like to think they are in control of the value of the product because they stick the price tag on it, it is still the public that decides the real value of goods and services.
In the case of this book, the story is the author's. He's not here for me to send a few bucks too. The rest is non-existant. Was I drawn to this series by a flashy ad or store display? No. So there were no advertising costs. Am I reading a book printed on nice paper with a hardback cover? No. In fact, there is no physical book at all! No printing costs then. Some poor soul with a crapload of time on his hands scanned and OCRed a copy on his own time and added PDF bookmarks at the chapter marks. Maybe I should send a buck to him since he's the one who labored over the production here? The book's publisher sure isn't paying anyone's ISP bill so they did incur any distribution costs for this PDF.
Really. Besides the value of the story itself, who do you think deserves to get paid and how much to they deserve considering what their actual contributions to this PDF file were?
I just find it hilarious these are the result of using a processor that is just now being released on what is considered too low a resolution by today's standards anyway.
If you can afford a system with a Core i7 processor, having a decent graphics card will not be a concern to you.
2. We shouldn't have to buy books on the used market just to keep someone from starving. If the used book selling business is obsolete thanks to digital distribution, those people need to get new jobs.
Nobody thought people should ride horses instead of cars to keep the blacksmith in business.
I would say "never".
Any attempt that would satisfy the DRM-requirements for a service to sign off on working with it would not be considered "open" enough by the Free Software fanatics.
Why don't you ask for a CableCard system for MythTV while you're at it? LOL.
If the waitstaff can't do simple math I don't want them tabulating a bill for me to begin with.
We could also just liquefy the dead and then feed them intravenously to the living. It would give our society a boost of machine-level efficiency.
Blah, that's better than me. I was expecting to read about the recent grizzly murder of a family of an elderly couple in their 90's and their seventy-something year old children who were still living with them (but no spouses for the children or third generation). In other words, the family that met the conditions of a nuclear family with the oldest members.
If you have to turn pages one at a time, yeah. But the e-paper version of you textbook could just have a link that takes you straight to the answer or to the section of the book the problem deals with. That would be slightly handier than having to keep a finger or something marking multiple points in a paper textbook. Actually, it's not like an e-ink reader even has to follow the constraints of how a paper book works. It could just as easily show you all three pages at once on different parts of the screen. Try doing that with your standard textbook without taking the binding apart.