The whole analog hole (and DRM in general) really isn't about piracy. The studios and labels know they won't be stopping anyone who wants to rip the off on a larger scale.
Instead, it's about us not format shifting, basically. The idea that you can take music or movies you bought and play wherever you are, at full quality, is anathema to them. They want us to pay for the CD. Then pay for the mobile phone version. And the portable player. And the car. And...
A lot of the movie and music sales - and an even larger part of the profits - the past fifteen years have been people rebuying stuff they own in a new format. Beloved LP recordings and worn out VHS tapes were bought again as CD:s and DVD:s. But now, with fully digitalized content, there is little reason to ever do that again. Copies don't degrade, and the quality is already high enough (especially for music) that a new format just isn't very tempting.
But if you stop people from moving their data from evice to device, people will have to re-buy their content whenever they get a new device. It's an eternal upgrade revenue stream, like the shift from recordings to CD, but without any improvement in the viewer experience;without even having to pay for remastering or repackaging, in fact. And the more fine-grained you make the mesh of walls, the more often we have to pay again. Studios probably love that online services aren't standardized or compatible with each other; it means another resale every time someone switches from one service to another.
In fact, if I were a studio executive, and of a manipulative frame of mind, I'd back one service to the hilt - for, say, three or four years. Then I'd switch allegiance to a new (but incompatible) service, nudging everybody to switch, and pay again. If I'd be _really_ manipulative, I'd look at what my fellow executives in other studios are doing and try to coordinate the shift with them (no need to actually make a shady deal; just follow the group). I wonder a little, in fact, just how much time iTunes has left as the current king of the hill.
A steady stream of income without ever even having to produce any content. Who would not love that business model?
Remember, every generally accepted scientific theory today started life as a fringe theory that the general consensus held was wrong.
No, actually. Plenty of theories, and perhaps most, were more in the nature of "duh, why didn't we realize that", with challenges being about hammering out the details (which usually are incorrect at first), and real pushback only coming from has-beens too set in their ways to readily accept change.
You mostly hear about the theories that were seriously fought over because, well, a good fight and controversy makes for an interesting story, while rapid consensus does not.
That or enforce the distinctions, so that only ISPs can have.nets, only charities.orgs, etc etc.
The idea of enforced categories is nice. You get into a whole lot of trouble over it, though - when is a non-profit a non-profit? Is it enough it is recognized as such in its home country, or do we need to create a common, supra-national definition (good luck with that)? Same for ISP:s, porn purveyors, educational institutions and so on.
Rather, I would like to see all top-level domains be "collections" of responsible sub-organizations - mostly, and perhaps only, country domains (though you could make a case that the division should be by jurisdiction rather than country - the EU would have one common top level for instance). The division is transparent and unambigous, and moves further decisions on organization down to a level with a homogenous set of laws and social constraints.
Each sub-organization is then free to allocate domain names and subnames as they see fit, as long as they don't break the mechanics of the net. So if the US wants to have a separate xxx domain for their porn, they'd create it as.xxx.us. If the UK wants to enfocre commercial and non-commercial division, they'd have (actually already do, I believe).com.uk and.org.uk (or whatever name thay want to use - if they want to call it.greedybastards.uk and.toogoodforthisworld.uk, they are free to do so).
I'd like to rephrase it as "The average user does not need the $CUTTING_EDGE_STUFF because the $CURRENT_CHEAP_LOWER_END will run all they want to do just fine for the next few years."
In, say, three years, when dual core systems are slowly entering the low end, it makes sense for business users (and, frankly, the vast majority of users in general) to get it. Right now, dual core is high end stuff stuff, with the price premium to prove it. Let the enthusiasts burn their cash on it, but for businesses, just wait another generation.
You're not leasing sports cars for your salesforce, you're not getting Mont Blanc pens for your office workers, why should you pay a premium on electronics that doesn't do anything for productivity either?
We already have that situation. I believe it's illegal to sell DVD players that ignore region coding in the US, while it's a challenge to find a player that doesn't ignore them in Sweden. Copyright has a different number of years in the US and Europe, meaning that there's material that's perfectly legal to copy and spread in the Europe (I believe some early Elvis recordings are coming up just about now) that are still under copyright in the US. You are specifically allowed to break protection schemes in Sweden for the purpose of archiving, format-shifting and for accessibility, while it is illegal in the US. Business patents are granted in the US but not honored in Europe.
The list is much longer than that, and that's just between two jurisdictions that I happen to know a bit about.
"Fired" is different, though. It implies you were canned because you were incompetent, or because you were engaged in something illegal, fraudulent or against company rules. You are fired when the problem is you, in other words, and presumably the company will need to hire or promote a replacement.
Most other terms (like the ones you list) is about the job disappearing. You were not doing anything wrong, but the job you were doing is either no longer necessary, or too expensive to continue doing at the current manpower level. You may be excellent at the job you were doing, but the result is no longer worth the expense for the company.
OpenBSD also produces OpenSSH. If you want to keep using OpenSSH, it may be a good idea if you sent them some money.
Or wait until OpenBSD dies, then fork OpenSSH as a separate project.
The original poster has a valid point, even if badly stated. From the statement it really does seem the devels are using OpenSSH as a hook to get money for OpenBSD, and it's backfiring on them. People who donate money do like to know it's going to the cause or project they actually care about, not something else. Here it seems pretty obvious that any donation will mostly or entirely go to OpenBSD development, not OpenSSH.
The leading cause of heart disease is to get old. Exercize all you want, and eat a healthy diet (and that includes meat, or meat-like protein sources), and chances are it's your heart that's going to do you in anyway.
I've used a Panasonic R3 for over a year, and it's womderful. Less than a kilo, good keyboard, 1Gb memory, and (in practice, with Ubuntu Linux,) 6-7 hours battery life.
Oh, and there's no fan. None at all. When I unplug it, the harddrive spins down and it's _totally_ quiet.
You _are_ aware that our 9th and 10th Amendments allow for the States and the People to perform these powers themselves?
But does it ever state that _somebody_ has to provide for any of it? And that includes any kind of military capability, of course. So if say, California and New York, decides they will not finance a war by a disagreeable president, it's quite ok for them to withold that money, I guess.
I'm not sure I could find where in the U.S. Constitution Congress is allotted the money or power to launch golf carts for a billion dollars.
Without even being American, I'm pretty sure that if you restrict the government to only the things expressly allowed in your constitution, you'd end up with being fifteen acres of the poorest hippies ever to own a printing press. You _are_ aware, are you not, that things like highways, fire brigades, the CDC or indeed a standing army are not covered by that constitution of yours?
Well, if you give one of your developers part of his time to help hack on some Apache module that your business uses, that doesn't give you a lot of steerage either - it gives you a bit, to be sure, but so does being a smaller customer. Indeed, that is another parallel - the more you invest, directly or indirectly, the more say you will have.
Businesses believe they need to pay something to ensure that there's a viable organization behind it.
I think this is pretty important. It's not just a simple "if its expensive, it must be good" kind of misattribution that some advocates argue. In part it's a "if everybody does it" kind of argument that actually works: "If we find it worth it to pay for this, then so do other businesses. Which means these people have a real, sustainable income stream, and a real future."
But for OSS vendors, I think the most important aspect is that the client gets a horse in the race, so to speak. As a paying client, they get a seat at the table, even if by proxy, and have a voice in what will happen with the product. They become Somebody. True, paying a developer to participate is another way - and even more influential - but if your business isn't software in the first place that is just not feasible. Paying a company to, in effect, pay developers by proxy is the next best thing.
'Google admitted that it was having difficulties recruiting developers and would be targeting students and engineers.'
Yeah, they finally had to acknowledge that the previous recruiting strategy of targeting florists and mime-artists just wasn't panning out, code quality-wise.
Well, "New AT&T Aquires Bellsouth" implies that it has happened. It hasn't (yet).
No. "Acquired" or "has Acquired" would imply it already happened. "Will Aqcuire" and so on says it may (will) happen at some point in the future. "Acquires" or "is Aqcuiring" for a non-instantaneous event both impliy a process that has begun, but is not finalized. For an instantaneous event, it would imply that it happened at this very moment, while for non-specific events it would be a description of a habitual recurrence.
Do _not_ diss the Washlet! That has got to be the single greatest invention of the late 20th century. OK, a bit hyperbolic, but it really is insanely comfortable - and in a home without central heating (still common in Japan), this doubles as the bathroom heater. Perhaps the models with radio, water pulse massage (some with a bidet mode that sells surprisingly briskly) and automagic deodorizer and paper dispenser are a bit over the top, but a basic, everyday heated Washlet is a must in any comfortable home.
Any nerd worth his salt would look at a flip phone and say "hey, this thing has signal-bearing electronics in the crotch of a mechanical hinge -- we need to fix that right away!"
So you'll never buy a laptop then?
I've had a couple of flip phones (I have a slide phone at the moment). Most people I know here in Japan has them. I have never heard of such a phone having the hinge break. I'm not saying it can't happen, of course, but based on my somewhat limited sample, I'd say it's not a major point of failure. Instead, when phones break, it seems to be the usual things - screen going wonky, keypad developing intermittent failures and so on.
Re:Anyone know what Vodafone's Japan market share
on
Vodafone Quitting Japan
·
· Score: 2, Informative
My phone book is mostly to Japanese, and perhaps one in twenty have a Vodaphone account. I think foreigners are overrepresented, in part because they can easily roam with Vodaphone in other countries.
Oh, and that spotty reception of yours could be due to it being Vodaphone too - one of the major (perceived, perhaps real) weaknesses is supposed to be their scanty coverage compared to their competition.
Re:It's today's version of the slide projector
on
A History of Flickr
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
For me flickr is a really good way to put up pictures I want to link to without having to put up my own server (which is an administrative hassle in any case, and impossible for me in my current circumstances). I don't have to worry about bandwidth limitations, backups, DNS issues, ISP/web hotels and so on.
The "Mark of the Beast" is most likely not being referred to as a physical thing, but rather the acceptance of a doctrine that affects how one thinks and behaves.
Since when have religious people been renowned for their logical ability and analytical thought processes?
It's the "go with the premium brand" way of determining quality. But notice that it only indirectly assumes that the premium service really is superior. Pay more + good reputation = good service. People do not generally take the time to actually find out for real exactly how the premium service differs in practcice.
And to the extent that the service actually is better, nowhere does that imply that it isn't outsourced. Just as rock-bottom service often can become cheaper by outsourcing, so can just about any service tier. The premium brand simply pays for a premium outsourced service in turn.
Slashdot Mirror
Look at the Japanese.... no one can sell electronics to them except Japanese.
I look around in stores here, and it's filled with stuff from Korean, Chinese, US and European firms. Samsung, Nokia, Apple...
The Xbox has done poorly here for the same reason US cars have done - no adaptation for the target market.
The whole analog hole (and DRM in general) really isn't about piracy. The studios and labels know they won't be stopping anyone who wants to rip the off on a larger scale.
...
Instead, it's about us not format shifting, basically. The idea that you can take music or movies you bought and play wherever you are, at full quality, is anathema to them. They want us to pay for the CD. Then pay for the mobile phone version. And the portable player. And the car. And
A lot of the movie and music sales - and an even larger part of the profits - the past fifteen years have been people rebuying stuff they own in a new format. Beloved LP recordings and worn out VHS tapes were bought again as CD:s and DVD:s. But now, with fully digitalized content, there is little reason to ever do that again. Copies don't degrade, and the quality is already high enough (especially for music) that a new format just isn't very tempting.
But if you stop people from moving their data from evice to device, people will have to re-buy their content whenever they get a new device. It's an eternal upgrade revenue stream, like the shift from recordings to CD, but without any improvement in the viewer experience;without even having to pay for remastering or repackaging, in fact. And the more fine-grained you make the mesh of walls, the more often we have to pay again. Studios probably love that online services aren't standardized or compatible with each other; it means another resale every time someone switches from one service to another.
In fact, if I were a studio executive, and of a manipulative frame of mind, I'd back one service to the hilt - for, say, three or four years. Then I'd switch allegiance to a new (but incompatible) service, nudging everybody to switch, and pay again. If I'd be _really_ manipulative, I'd look at what my fellow executives in other studios are doing and try to coordinate the shift with them (no need to actually make a shady deal; just follow the group). I wonder a little, in fact, just how much time iTunes has left as the current king of the hill.
A steady stream of income without ever even having to produce any content. Who would not love that business model?
Remember, every generally accepted scientific theory today started life as a fringe theory that the general consensus held was wrong.
No, actually. Plenty of theories, and perhaps most, were more in the nature of "duh, why didn't we realize that", with challenges being about hammering out the details (which usually are incorrect at first), and real pushback only coming from has-beens too set in their ways to readily accept change.
You mostly hear about the theories that were seriously fought over because, well, a good fight and controversy makes for an interesting story, while rapid consensus does not.
That or enforce the distinctions, so that only ISPs can have .nets, only charities .orgs, etc etc.
.xxx.us. If the UK wants to enfocre commercial and non-commercial division, they'd have (actually already do, I believe) .com.uk and .org.uk (or whatever name thay want to use - if they want to call it .greedybastards.uk and .toogoodforthisworld.uk, they are free to do so).
The idea of enforced categories is nice. You get into a whole lot of trouble over it, though - when is a non-profit a non-profit? Is it enough it is recognized as such in its home country, or do we need to create a common, supra-national definition (good luck with that)? Same for ISP:s, porn purveyors, educational institutions and so on.
Rather, I would like to see all top-level domains be "collections" of responsible sub-organizations - mostly, and perhaps only, country domains (though you could make a case that the division should be by jurisdiction rather than country - the EU would have one common top level for instance). The division is transparent and unambigous, and moves further decisions on organization down to a level with a homogenous set of laws and social constraints.
Each sub-organization is then free to allocate domain names and subnames as they see fit, as long as they don't break the mechanics of the net. So if the US wants to have a separate xxx domain for their porn, they'd create it as
I'd like to rephrase it as "The average user does not need the $CUTTING_EDGE_STUFF because the $CURRENT_CHEAP_LOWER_END will run all they want to do just fine for the next few years."
In, say, three years, when dual core systems are slowly entering the low end, it makes sense for business users (and, frankly, the vast majority of users in general) to get it. Right now, dual core is high end stuff stuff, with the price premium to prove it. Let the enthusiasts burn their cash on it, but for businesses, just wait another generation.
You're not leasing sports cars for your salesforce, you're not getting Mont Blanc pens for your office workers, why should you pay a premium on electronics that doesn't do anything for productivity either?
We already have that situation. I believe it's illegal to sell DVD players that ignore region coding in the US, while it's a challenge to find a player that doesn't ignore them in Sweden. Copyright has a different number of years in the US and Europe, meaning that there's material that's perfectly legal to copy and spread in the Europe (I believe some early Elvis recordings are coming up just about now) that are still under copyright in the US. You are specifically allowed to break protection schemes in Sweden for the purpose of archiving, format-shifting and for accessibility, while it is illegal in the US. Business patents are granted in the US but not honored in Europe.
The list is much longer than that, and that's just between two jurisdictions that I happen to know a bit about.
"Fired" is different, though. It implies you were canned because you were incompetent, or because you were engaged in something illegal, fraudulent or against company rules. You are fired when the problem is you, in other words, and presumably the company will need to hire or promote a replacement.
Most other terms (like the ones you list) is about the job disappearing. You were not doing anything wrong, but the job you were doing is either no longer necessary, or too expensive to continue doing at the current manpower level. You may be excellent at the job you were doing, but the result is no longer worth the expense for the company.
OpenBSD also produces OpenSSH. If you want to keep using OpenSSH, it may be a good idea if you sent them some money.
Or wait until OpenBSD dies, then fork OpenSSH as a separate project.
The original poster has a valid point, even if badly stated. From the statement it really does seem the devels are using OpenSSH as a hook to get money for OpenBSD, and it's backfiring on them. People who donate money do like to know it's going to the cause or project they actually care about, not something else. Here it seems pretty obvious that any donation will mostly or entirely go to OpenBSD development, not OpenSSH.
What is going on?
Large scale graft.
And, does anyone even care?
No.
The leading cause of heart disease is to get old. Exercize all you want, and eat a healthy diet (and that includes meat, or meat-like protein sources), and chances are it's your heart that's going to do you in anyway.
I've used a Panasonic R3 for over a year, and it's womderful. Less than a kilo, good keyboard, 1Gb memory, and (in practice, with Ubuntu Linux,) 6-7 hours battery life.
Oh, and there's no fan. None at all. When I unplug it, the harddrive spins down and it's _totally_ quiet.
Common Defence and General Welfare cover things like highways, fire brigades, the CDC and standing armies.
Oh? I don't see it.
You _are_ aware that our 9th and 10th Amendments allow for the States and the People to perform these powers themselves?
But does it ever state that _somebody_ has to provide for any of it? And that includes any kind of military capability, of course. So if say, California and New York, decides they will not finance a war by a disagreeable president, it's quite ok for them to withold that money, I guess.
I'm not sure I could find where in the U.S. Constitution Congress is allotted the money or power to launch golf carts for a billion dollars.
Without even being American, I'm pretty sure that if you restrict the government to only the things expressly allowed in your constitution, you'd end up with being fifteen acres of the poorest hippies ever to own a printing press. You _are_ aware, are you not, that things like highways, fire brigades, the CDC or indeed a standing army are not covered by that constitution of yours?
Well, if you give one of your developers part of his time to help hack on some Apache module that your business uses, that doesn't give you a lot of steerage either - it gives you a bit, to be sure, but so does being a smaller customer. Indeed, that is another parallel - the more you invest, directly or indirectly, the more say you will have.
Businesses believe they need to pay something to ensure that there's a viable organization behind it.
I think this is pretty important. It's not just a simple "if its expensive, it must be good" kind of misattribution that some advocates argue. In part it's a "if everybody does it" kind of argument that actually works: "If we find it worth it to pay for this, then so do other businesses. Which means these people have a real, sustainable income stream, and a real future."
But for OSS vendors, I think the most important aspect is that the client gets a horse in the race, so to speak. As a paying client, they get a seat at the table, even if by proxy, and have a voice in what will happen with the product. They become Somebody. True, paying a developer to participate is another way - and even more influential - but if your business isn't software in the first place that is just not feasible. Paying a company to, in effect, pay developers by proxy is the next best thing.
'Google admitted that it was having difficulties recruiting developers and would be targeting students and engineers.'
Yeah, they finally had to acknowledge that the previous recruiting strategy of targeting florists and mime-artists just wasn't panning out, code quality-wise.
So we really should have private armies, then. And we should be voting for the best corporate tender for running the government.
Well, "New AT&T Aquires Bellsouth" implies that it has happened. It hasn't (yet).
No. "Acquired" or "has Acquired" would imply it already happened. "Will Aqcuire" and so on says it may (will) happen at some point in the future. "Acquires" or "is Aqcuiring" for a non-instantaneous event both impliy a process that has begun, but is not finalized. For an instantaneous event, it would imply that it happened at this very moment, while for non-specific events it would be a description of a habitual recurrence.
The headline is correct.
Do _not_ diss the Washlet! That has got to be the single greatest invention of the late 20th century. OK, a bit hyperbolic, but it really is insanely comfortable - and in a home without central heating (still common in Japan), this doubles as the bathroom heater. Perhaps the models with radio, water pulse massage (some with a bidet mode that sells surprisingly briskly) and automagic deodorizer and paper dispenser are a bit over the top, but a basic, everyday heated Washlet is a must in any comfortable home.
Any nerd worth his salt would look at a flip phone and say "hey, this thing has signal-bearing electronics in the crotch of a mechanical hinge -- we need to fix that right away!"
So you'll never buy a laptop then?
I've had a couple of flip phones (I have a slide phone at the moment). Most people I know here in Japan has them. I have never heard of such a phone having the hinge break. I'm not saying it can't happen, of course, but based on my somewhat limited sample, I'd say it's not a major point of failure. Instead, when phones break, it seems to be the usual things - screen going wonky, keypad developing intermittent failures and so on.
My phone book is mostly to Japanese, and perhaps one in twenty have a Vodaphone account. I think foreigners are overrepresented, in part because they can easily roam with Vodaphone in other countries.
Oh, and that spotty reception of yours could be due to it being Vodaphone too - one of the major (perceived, perhaps real) weaknesses is supposed to be their scanty coverage compared to their competition.
For me flickr is a really good way to put up pictures I want to link to without having to put up my own server (which is an administrative hassle in any case, and impossible for me in my current circumstances). I don't have to worry about bandwidth limitations, backups, DNS issues, ISP/web hotels and so on.
The "Mark of the Beast" is most likely not being referred to as a physical thing, but rather the acceptance of a doctrine that affects how one thinks and behaves.
Since when have religious people been renowned for their logical ability and analytical thought processes?
It's the "go with the premium brand" way of determining quality. But notice that it only indirectly assumes that the premium service really is superior. Pay more + good reputation = good service. People do not generally take the time to actually find out for real exactly how the premium service differs in practcice.
And to the extent that the service actually is better, nowhere does that imply that it isn't outsourced. Just as rock-bottom service often can become cheaper by outsourcing, so can just about any service tier. The premium brand simply pays for a premium outsourced service in turn.