The entitlement mentality of the RIAA is astounding.
Radio has for decades played their songs as advertising. In the past record companies have gotten in trouble for paying radio stations to play certain music.
Now they want to have their cake and eat it too.
There is NO DIFFERENCE between the radio playing the song and a streaming service playing the song. It is still advertising for the record company. I have bought many songs after hearing them on a streaming service. I also already own many songs that play on streaming services I listen to. The record company being paid per play by streaming services is obnoxious crap.
I always smile when I think of how badly Apple and Amazon screwed over the record companies in providing access to digital versions of their music. They had the ability to build their own stores and they were idiotic enough to fail and it the process hand over billions to companies that laid the digital groundwork for them. True, record companies make money from Amazon and Apple, but Amazon and Apple make money off the record companies too _and_ they completely control the ecosystem.
I'm anxiously waiting for Apple, Amazon, and Google to start getting into the business of distributing artists songs just like they do for app developers. They could also use their promotional capabilities to drive sales for these artists. Sales where they make more money than selling what the record companies give them. When this happens the writing will be on the wall and the record companies will finally die the death they so deserve.
Agreed, the jury in this case should be ASHAMED of themselves. There are people who are at fault accidentally killing other human beings who receive less punishment than they are handing out for someone "stealing" 30 songs.
The verdict handed down in this case is a life destroying verdict for a young man. That the RIAA keeps appealing for its huge award is DISGUSTING.
Giant corporate entities are working at utterly destroying one person's life. The RIAA deserves every ounce of contempt and disdain it gets from the people.
For companies that like to believe that they create things that move human emotions and make people think, the RIAA collectively is a horribly dark, twisted, and evil group of people (and the MPAA is even. worse.)
I don't know much history!!?? I think you're talking about Glass-Steagle which regulated banks and investing. It may have been a good regulation.
But Sarbanes Oxley is total crap regulation. I was working at a very large company whe SOX came out it added man years of work for IT throughout the company. And all the reports it asked for and demanded were not worth a crap for stopping corruption. It was all busy work garbage to make the govt feel like it would stop the next Enron. Except Enron did evil because they were an evil company not because their systems were not monitored.
Bullshit. A free market yields greater freedom and greater flexibility to the individual than government mandates do.
This problem is always framed to say "If the government doesn't regulate it then horrible stuff will happen."
Rational governance is great, but excuse me, where the fuck is the rational governance from either side lately?
A healthy free market is one of the strongest forces for science and innovation that can possibly exist. However, in our current corporate culture many many barriers to truly free competition and innovation have caused problems, but if you dig even a small bit into the issues that are corrupting our free markets, you'll see crappy government regulations and regulatory capture of the government regulators by the industries they regulate.
Exactly... I wonder how well OS X worked the first time Apple ran it on this hardware. I bet it didn't even boot.
I know you're joking, but the corollary here would actually be how good OS X would work on hardware tuned specifically for Linux. The answer to that would likely be "very poorly" as well.
I agree that they're just labels. But there was a strong inference in the article conflating political opinion with the software methodology in the labeling.
I think that is unfortunate and stick by my Agile/Waterfall labels being better suited to the issue. You could probably also substitute Top Down/Bottom Up as labels. Conservative/Liberal have too much baggage.
The conservative/liberal dynamic applied to software development is total bullshit.
Software development has and Agile/Waterfall split, professionals in the business know this, its as simple as that. Applying conservative and liberal as tags is stupid.
The conservatives need to change their stance on global warming. The reason they are always "against" it is that all the political solutions to global warming that are proffered by the left represent the left's statist wet dream. But as I have come to realize, the only real way to solve global warming is through advancements in science and engineering to give us cheap reliable sources of green energy.
The left may say that their statist utopia and an all powerful communal government would solve this, but they'd be just as wrong as they were every other time they've gotten that chance in the past.
We need to find the next Einstein or Tesla to think up solutions to global warming, not the next Mao or Lenin.
I know this is old and late, but I have to respond.
Insurance companies are REQUIRED by law to invest their income in order to have money to pay out claims.
You are forbidden by law from setting up an insurance company that pays out claims to some policy holders only with money from the other holders. They must hold investments to raise the money over time to pay policies.
This is where the bait and switch of Social Security comes in. Technically they've invested the money that comes in, but in reality the government spends all of the money that comes in on benefits and if there is a surplus, they spend that on other things the government wants and issues an IOU to Social Security. Payment of those IOUs is supposed to cover future retirement benefits, but that payment will need to be covered by extra taxes or extra borrowing.
ie. there is no lock box.
Social Security funds were "invested" in such a way that calling in the IOUs required to pay off the boomers retirement benefits results in a NEGATIVE return on investment of those dollars.
Again an insurance company that operated this way would either go bankrupt or be brought up on charges of breaking the law.
I really do not get why progressives are so violently adamant about not means testing Social Security.
You want to tax the living snot out of the rich to balance the budget, but are unwilling to just stop writing monthly checks to extremely wealthy people who are over 65.
IMHO Warren Buffet should pay more in taxes AND not be given money every month by a government that is running a deficit.
Things like the insanely large defense budget, and handing the younger generations money to the richest segment of the population (everyone wants Warran Buffet to pay more in taxes, NO ONE is asking what the hell we're doing giving him a social security check every month or paying for all his medical bills).
You could eliminate the non-defense discretionary budget 100% (elimiate every non-defense segment of the government) and we'd still be running a deficit.
Social Security and Medicare must be massively reformed to be means based and not handouts to everyone over 65 (who are far far richer as a group than everyone under 30). In addition to this the defense budget needs to be cut by at least 1/3.
Cutting any other parts of government, while mildly helpful to deficit spending, is smoke and mirrors.
The sacred cows must be offered up by both parties or we're going to be screwed. The math to fixing the nation's budget problems doesn't work any other way.
Dammit, dude. I specifically didn't come down on one side or the other, I was just pointing out that you can have two statements that seem at odds that can both statistically be true.
i.e. AGW proponents can truly state that X of the last 10 years are the warmest on record.
and
AGW skeptics can accurately state that the trend is downward. Primarily because if it was an upward trend, then the maximum would be passed again.
So my main point is that a true analysis of the issue requires people to look at the data from a broader perspective. In fact there could even be a downward trend in temperatures between two years, but still a general upward trend over longer timescales.
In fact, IMHO climate data year to year can be very volatile.
A note to the MPAA. You better be careful what you wish for.
My family loves and adores Netflix. It is an creative and innovative method of consuming entertainment.
If the MPAA succeeds in their obscene desire to destroy Netflix at any cost, I WILL NEVER EVER respect their "IP" rights. I will steal any content I want.
I am sick to death of the entertainment industry on bing hellbent on not letting me enjoy the entertainment they are selling in the way I choose to.
They should view Netflix as a godsend that enables them to have a future. Instead they view it as the enemy.
If they destroy Netflix, I will have no ethical problem stealing what the movie and TV industry creates. Their obscene greed and arrogance doesn't give them any moral standing to lecture the customers who they depend on for their existence.
GIVE US WHAT WE WANT! Oh and what we want is to not wait months after DVDs are released to stream movies, and we don't want to pay $5 to rent a streaming video, and we don't think ridiculous DRM schemes (hello ultraviolet) are reasonable.
It is statistically true that the last 10 years do not have an increasing trend yet are still part of the set of hottest years on record. For example, if 1998 is the hottest year, then by definition the trend from then to now must be declining. But years after 1998 can also be hot enough to be included in the list of hottest years.
People's understanding of statistics and numerical analysis is woefully inadequate.
Very interesting idea. This would definitely explain why, upon reading the trilogy, I found psychohistory so distasteful.
I felt the Foundation trilogy was nowhere near as good as people made it out to be. The Dune books far far outpaced it in creating a complex galactic human empire.
Slashdot Mirror
For an industry that continually drives products to obsolescence every 18 months, the terms of patents is waaaaaayyyyyy too long.
The entitlement mentality of the RIAA is astounding.
Radio has for decades played their songs as advertising. In the past record companies have gotten in trouble for paying radio stations to play certain music.
Now they want to have their cake and eat it too.
There is NO DIFFERENCE between the radio playing the song and a streaming service playing the song. It is still advertising for the record company. I have bought many songs after hearing them on a streaming service. I also already own many songs that play on streaming services I listen to. The record company being paid per play by streaming services is obnoxious crap.
I always smile when I think of how badly Apple and Amazon screwed over the record companies in providing access to digital versions of their music. They had the ability to build their own stores and they were idiotic enough to fail and it the process hand over billions to companies that laid the digital groundwork for them. True, record companies make money from Amazon and Apple, but Amazon and Apple make money off the record companies too _and_ they completely control the ecosystem.
I'm anxiously waiting for Apple, Amazon, and Google to start getting into the business of distributing artists songs just like they do for app developers. They could also use their promotional capabilities to drive sales for these artists. Sales where they make more money than selling what the record companies give them. When this happens the writing will be on the wall and the record companies will finally die the death they so deserve.
Agreed, the jury in this case should be ASHAMED of themselves. There are people who are at fault accidentally killing other human beings who receive less punishment than they are handing out for someone "stealing" 30 songs.
The verdict handed down in this case is a life destroying verdict for a young man. That the RIAA keeps appealing for its huge award is DISGUSTING.
Giant corporate entities are working at utterly destroying one person's life. The RIAA deserves every ounce of contempt and disdain it gets from the people.
For companies that like to believe that they create things that move human emotions and make people think, the RIAA collectively is a horribly dark, twisted, and evil group of people (and the MPAA is even. worse.)
I don't know much history!!?? I think you're talking about Glass-Steagle which regulated banks and investing. It may have been a good regulation.
But Sarbanes Oxley is total crap regulation. I was working at a very large company whe SOX came out it added man years of work for IT throughout the company. And all the reports it asked for and demanded were not worth a crap for stopping corruption. It was all busy work garbage to make the govt feel like it would stop the next Enron. Except Enron did evil because they were an evil company not because their systems were not monitored.
Bullshit. A free market yields greater freedom and greater flexibility to the individual than government mandates do.
This problem is always framed to say "If the government doesn't regulate it then horrible stuff will happen."
Rational governance is great, but excuse me, where the fuck is the rational governance from either side lately?
A healthy free market is one of the strongest forces for science and innovation that can possibly exist. However, in our current corporate culture many many barriers to truly free competition and innovation have caused problems, but if you dig even a small bit into the issues that are corrupting our free markets, you'll see crappy government regulations and regulatory capture of the government regulators by the industries they regulate.
Exactly... I wonder how well OS X worked the first time Apple ran it on this hardware. I bet it didn't even boot.
I know you're joking, but the corollary here would actually be how good OS X would work on hardware tuned specifically for Linux. The answer to that would likely be "very poorly" as well.
I agree that they're just labels. But there was a strong inference in the article conflating political opinion with the software methodology in the labeling.
I think that is unfortunate and stick by my Agile/Waterfall labels being better suited to the issue. You could probably also substitute Top Down/Bottom Up as labels. Conservative/Liberal have too much baggage.
Linux doesn't work completely on brand new hardware!!
This is totally shocking to me. This has only been a problem since the 90's.
The conservative/liberal dynamic applied to software development is total bullshit.
Software development has and Agile/Waterfall split, professionals in the business know this, its as simple as that. Applying conservative and liberal as tags is stupid.
The conservatives need to change their stance on global warming. The reason they are always "against" it is that all the political solutions to global warming that are proffered by the left represent the left's statist wet dream. But as I have come to realize, the only real way to solve global warming is through advancements in science and engineering to give us cheap reliable sources of green energy.
The left may say that their statist utopia and an all powerful communal government would solve this, but they'd be just as wrong as they were every other time they've gotten that chance in the past.
We need to find the next Einstein or Tesla to think up solutions to global warming, not the next Mao or Lenin.
I know this is old and late, but I have to respond.
Insurance companies are REQUIRED by law to invest their income in order to have money to pay out claims.
You are forbidden by law from setting up an insurance company that pays out claims to some policy holders only with money from the other holders. They must hold investments to raise the money over time to pay policies.
This is where the bait and switch of Social Security comes in. Technically they've invested the money that comes in, but in reality the government spends all of the money that comes in on benefits and if there is a surplus, they spend that on other things the government wants and issues an IOU to Social Security. Payment of those IOUs is supposed to cover future retirement benefits, but that payment will need to be covered by extra taxes or extra borrowing.
ie. there is no lock box.
Social Security funds were "invested" in such a way that calling in the IOUs required to pay off the boomers retirement benefits results in a NEGATIVE return on investment of those dollars.
Again an insurance company that operated this way would either go bankrupt or be brought up on charges of breaking the law.
I really do not get why progressives are so violently adamant about not means testing Social Security.
You want to tax the living snot out of the rich to balance the budget, but are unwilling to just stop writing monthly checks to extremely wealthy people who are over 65.
IMHO Warren Buffet should pay more in taxes AND not be given money every month by a government that is running a deficit.
Yeah, I still watch all the "get blazingly fast 4G" adds thinking that they should be forced to include disclosures like are required on drug adds.
"using AT&T's 4G service at full speed for 30 minutes will surpass the subscriber's bandwidth cap."
"Watching a movie over 4G is not recommended as none of our data plans cover that amount of data."
We should stop spending on irrelevant things
No, not like NOAA, the USGS, etc.
but rather
Things like the insanely large defense budget, and handing the younger generations money to the richest segment of the population (everyone wants Warran Buffet to pay more in taxes, NO ONE is asking what the hell we're doing giving him a social security check every month or paying for all his medical bills).
You could eliminate the non-defense discretionary budget 100% (elimiate every non-defense segment of the government) and we'd still be running a deficit.
Social Security and Medicare must be massively reformed to be means based and not handouts to everyone over 65 (who are far far richer as a group than everyone under 30). In addition to this the defense budget needs to be cut by at least 1/3.
Cutting any other parts of government, while mildly helpful to deficit spending, is smoke and mirrors.
The sacred cows must be offered up by both parties or we're going to be screwed. The math to fixing the nation's budget problems doesn't work any other way.
+1 internets for you sir.
I do pay for entertainment. I pay my Netflix bill every month.....
Malthus? Is that you?
Dammit, dude. I specifically didn't come down on one side or the other, I was just pointing out that you can have two statements that seem at odds that can both statistically be true.
i.e. AGW proponents can truly state that X of the last 10 years are the warmest on record.
and
AGW skeptics can accurately state that the trend is downward. Primarily because if it was an upward trend, then the maximum would be passed again.
So my main point is that a true analysis of the issue requires people to look at the data from a broader perspective. In fact there could even be a downward trend in temperatures between two years, but still a general upward trend over longer timescales.
In fact, IMHO climate data year to year can be very volatile.
A note to the MPAA. You better be careful what you wish for.
My family loves and adores Netflix. It is an creative and innovative method of consuming entertainment.
If the MPAA succeeds in their obscene desire to destroy Netflix at any cost, I WILL NEVER EVER respect their "IP" rights. I will steal any content I want.
I am sick to death of the entertainment industry on bing hellbent on not letting me enjoy the entertainment they are selling in the way I choose to.
They should view Netflix as a godsend that enables them to have a future. Instead they view it as the enemy.
If they destroy Netflix, I will have no ethical problem stealing what the movie and TV industry creates. Their obscene greed and arrogance doesn't give them any moral standing to lecture the customers who they depend on for their existence.
GIVE US WHAT WE WANT! Oh and what we want is to not wait months after DVDs are released to stream movies, and we don't want to pay $5 to rent a streaming video, and we don't think ridiculous DRM schemes (hello ultraviolet) are reasonable.
It is statistically true that the last 10 years do not have an increasing trend yet are still part of the set of hottest years on record. For example, if 1998 is the hottest year, then by definition the trend from then to now must be declining. But years after 1998 can also be hot enough to be included in the list of hottest years.
People's understanding of statistics and numerical analysis is woefully inadequate.
Because the progressives believe that they can perfect their fellow man. Which is what makes them so dangerous. See: prohibition.
Very interesting idea. This would definitely explain why, upon reading the trilogy, I found psychohistory so distasteful.
I felt the Foundation trilogy was nowhere near as good as people made it out to be. The Dune books far far outpaced it in creating a complex galactic human empire.
Whooossshh.
You're totally missing the point. The famous quote is "we have met the enemy and he is us."
That is why it is a snarky (and accurate) turn of phrase to say "we have met the enemy and he is (the) U.S."
Relating to the old quote is meant to give context via the truth of the snarky new stating of it. It gives the statement more weight.
You're literally taking it to literally.... ;-)
Aren't you being redundant?
There are things that the Romans did and things that they engineered that we did not reestablish until the last 100 years or so.
They were, at their time, the height of civilization and their civilization was a function of the climate they existed in.
Studying the climate during the span of their empire is a good thing to do.
Wish I could moderate you +2 .... puns.