Nook doesn't need a key server - the DRM is based around a hash of name/CC#, so as long as you still have those you'll be able to unlock your books on any machine with a supporting reader installed.
At least on Xbox - I don't know about Playstation - this isn't a problem. The player who "owns" the pass can play on any console, and all players using the owner's console can play too.
Recent versions of iTunes (which I assume you use since you said you wish you could do that with Apple Lossless) can automaticalle transcode content to 128 kbps when copying it to an iPod.
Ugh. I'm glad that's not in Ann Arbor proper, and hope that they don't take it as an example of something to build! (And very amused that I could find out where it actually is just based on the Barnes & Noble in the corner of the image...)
What tax burden is Amazon imposing on the state? They're not using any land in the state, they're not using any services that they aren't already paying for (the postage pays for the gas taxes that pay for the road use by the delivery company's vehicles) The state wants money without doing anything in exchange for it.
In the ultra-short-term, yes. In the long term, if the publisher doesn't earn the flat fee thru sales, the future opportunity goes away both for that individual and all authors as a group.
For new titles, sure. But the specific titles in question are a decade old; I can't help but think that it's too long term for the publisher to care about whether or not the book earned out (that would've happened in the first couple of years, I'd think—the same period that was paid for upfront).
In all honesty, I think book publishing should be flat fee for all, after all, I don't get royalties every time someone clicks a "href" or shoves a packet thru my routers. There is no economic risk of "warehouses full of unsold (e)books"
That's a terrible analogy, unless by "your routers" you mean ones that you built and sold yourself. You're right that there's no economic risk, which is an argument for cutting down on the royalty portion for the publisher. But why should the author only get a flat fee? That would mean that whether a book sold 1 copy or 10 million, the publisher would get all the money and the author would get nothing. What incentive is there for the author to turn in something that isn't a complete turd, if they get paid no matter what?
Depending on the book, the author may not be making any money; Mike Stackpole was paid a flat fee in lieu of royalties on some of his titles, for example.
If the government has an interest in prolonging life in general, why aren't there any countries (well, maybe Japan or Sweden, but certainly not the Canada or UK) making sure to actually do that for their citizens?
You can freely experiment on tech without someone suing you for medical malpractice. It's much harder to make advances in medicine when nothing can ever be tested.
Prius sales aren't helped by their lack of availability. There was a month-long wait for one at my local dealership when I was looking at new cars a year ago, and I wasn't interested in waiting.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the first game, but only about half of players who started Mass Effect 2 finished it.
Apparently even Apple engineers can't, seeing as how they killed the Xserve.
That's okay, for EA they kill their servers fast enough that the game will only change hands 1 or 2 times before the multiplayer is dead. ;)
They'll be selling Lion on USB for $70 in a month or so, so you're still $10 ahead this way.
One where it can power up and the data is still recoverable, perhaps?
If you want to help them keep track, then make use of their "read in store" feature on the Nook. :)
Nook doesn't need a key server - the DRM is based around a hash of name/CC#, so as long as you still have those you'll be able to unlock your books on any machine with a supporting reader installed.
At least on Xbox - I don't know about Playstation - this isn't a problem. The player who "owns" the pass can play on any console, and all players using the owner's console can play too.
Well, it's happened.
And outlaw secure Internet-based monetary transactions? Yeah, that'll go over well...
If the TSA are not LEOs, then why aren't they being prosecuted for unlawful detainment?
It may damage the country for a generation, but at least it would force a solution, instead of this endless spiral into chaos.
Recent versions of iTunes (which I assume you use since you said you wish you could do that with Apple Lossless) can automaticalle transcode content to 128 kbps when copying it to an iPod.
Ugh. I'm glad that's not in Ann Arbor proper, and hope that they don't take it as an example of something to build! (And very amused that I could find out where it actually is just based on the Barnes & Noble in the corner of the image...)
What tax burden is Amazon imposing on the state? They're not using any land in the state, they're not using any services that they aren't already paying for (the postage pays for the gas taxes that pay for the road use by the delivery company's vehicles) The state wants money without doing anything in exchange for it.
In the ultra-short-term, yes. In the long term, if the publisher doesn't earn the flat fee thru sales, the future opportunity goes away both for that individual and all authors as a group.
For new titles, sure. But the specific titles in question are a decade old; I can't help but think that it's too long term for the publisher to care about whether or not the book earned out (that would've happened in the first couple of years, I'd think—the same period that was paid for upfront).
In all honesty, I think book publishing should be flat fee for all, after all, I don't get royalties every time someone clicks a "href" or shoves a packet thru my routers. There is no economic risk of "warehouses full of unsold (e)books"
That's a terrible analogy, unless by "your routers" you mean ones that you built and sold yourself. You're right that there's no economic risk, which is an argument for cutting down on the royalty portion for the publisher. But why should the author only get a flat fee? That would mean that whether a book sold 1 copy or 10 million, the publisher would get all the money and the author would get nothing. What incentive is there for the author to turn in something that isn't a complete turd, if they get paid no matter what?
Depending on the book, the author may not be making any money; Mike Stackpole was paid a flat fee in lieu of royalties on some of his titles, for example.
If the government has an interest in prolonging life in general, why aren't there any countries (well, maybe Japan or Sweden, but certainly not the Canada or UK) making sure to actually do that for their citizens?
You can freely experiment on tech without someone suing you for medical malpractice. It's much harder to make advances in medicine when nothing can ever be tested.
They didn't have Homeland Security wiggling their fingers and watching the airlines and passengers dance like marionettes.
There exist Calibre plugins for DRM removal so everything can be handled automatically, though for obvious reasons the author doesn't include them.
Tales of Monkey Island is Monkey Island 5, not a remake of the original. :)
In the US, you're correct. In the UK, my understanding is that they typically use the plural for conglomerations.
Not during this last decade, no.
Prius sales aren't helped by their lack of availability. There was a month-long wait for one at my local dealership when I was looking at new cars a year ago, and I wasn't interested in waiting.