truthfully, we have all been waiting for the riaa to shoot themselves in the foot, and it looks like congress is going to encourage them to do so, from the summary. However, the initial costs of that are probably going to suck, with a lot of good radio sites likely going to shut down (pandora, di.fm, stuff like that)....but at least the ensuing result is certain things will hopefully change in concerns to this you can't allow people to choose what to play off your playlist law. The unfortunate side is "hopefully" and also praying that we don't have some kind of RIAA sponsored payola to bring about crappy music streaming stations that they support.
Does anyone have specs on this thing or some explanation beyond "it's being developed"? Also if a screen is that tiny how would someone see the ads anyway (not that many people even read ads)...and of course, the most important 2 part question:
let me jump right on that bandwagon!
oh by the way, did I mention that for $300 more dollars that you can give us more of your dollars in a safe, affordable transaction, you can get vista business edition via giving us more of your dollars?
Interesting. Do you have some wiki links or something for my edification of these ultrasonic devices and the other things you referenced, also to back them up? I had no luck searching any of them via google. Thanks.
This sand you refer to, is this warm sand? Haha. I think you may be overthinking how such a plate would work. In no means does it have to be sensitive enough for you to notice the pressure in any fashion at all. Think how pressure plates work for vehicles at intersections, fast food restaurants, etc. Same idea but generating power from it. Standing on one of those plates you wouldn't notice that it's there or not with no difference than the cement next to it. Also if the plate had an extremely small amount of give that would actually be better on your feet for prolonged priods. Someone could take it a step further and even use water pressure underneath a layer of cement to create a sort of hydroelectric power if it was equally efficient. I don't think using people for electricity is exactly wonderful but this method isn't "suspicious", its more like the concept of using solar power. However I don't like some corporation abusing our presence to benefit without our consent or even knowledge.
I've seen arguments for both sides, but I have to say that this is crazy. After reading the article, I find it a bit odd that people don't read the implications of this beyond their nose in front of them. I would say the only allowance to tap this database would be search warrants, there needs to be a lot of restriction on this or completely trash the idea...otherwise I'd say we have an equal right to cover our license plates with reflective things to make it impossible to read. Like someone had mentioned, the last thing we need is another place where people can appropriate where you drive with "representing yourself", aka abuse of this data can run very rampant.
How far reaching is this? It seems from the article that this is "guilt by association" as well. FTA: "The rules apply any to broadcasts or rebroadcasts in any medium."
Overall I'm mixed, but honestly this could be somewhat entertaining, I'm curious to if they'll keep the original style or "improve". It was like futurama gone cgi with some creative ideas in it. Plus wasn't this like somewhat breakthrough animation back in the early cgi days of Reboot, Beast Wars, all that stuff?
I will step in to try to assist a little here:) This article about DRM limiting storage is one example of one of Tivo's problems....basically the device can store anything for as long as you want but due to restrictive DRM you can be limited on if you can store what you have stored, indefinitely (remember fair use issues).
Sorry thats all I can find without taking forever to research, also perhaps Tivo preventing skipping (drm lock) would also be relevant. Oh and I found the original limiting storage article
Personally I'm all for Tivo but in reality spending 50$ on a HD tuner card and 150$ on a 500gig+ hard drive to use in a PC seems better for recording/control/etc. However I hope this shows some problems with Tivo that are DRM related, including the bugs last year that you mentioned.
So I'm confused, is this considered a shill or just a biased opinion, considering that the author works for SCO?
From Alfresco.com:
Prior to Alfresco, Asay co-founded Novell®'s Linux Business Office in 2002 and was an early agitator and architect for the company's shift to open source. In 2003 Asay founded the Open Source Business Conference, the industry's premier open source strategy event, and has served as an Entreprenuer-in-Residence for Thomas Weisel Venture Partners, focusing on open source investment opportunities. Before Novell, Asay was General Manager at Lineo®, an embedded Linux software startup, where he ran Lineo's Residential Gateway business.
If anyone's wondering who Lineo is, its Caldera AKA SCO GROUP . How does someone this biased manage to make it on CNET? Can someone explain that to me please?
I am not trying to rationalize this but as computing power increases doesn't the capability to handle a larger data stream become realistic or no? I'm looking it this from a fairly simple perspective.
Also isn't someone already having to handle such streams? Don't tier 1 networks have to be able to handle far more than such things already? What about the likes of Google or MSFT perhaps? (not that it means that it's viable for the rest of the world). In another thread with similar questions(but not the ones I pose here) I mentioned a similar idea and people expressed that it is not difficult to handle large amounts of traffic, the idea seems circular once again.
Can you give me a general idea of how much bandwith a computer could handle and/or what type of computer? Being someone who has never worked in such security I have no quantifiable idea of how much processing is needed. Would this be like a dual 8core pc with 16gigs of ram can handle 1/2 a GB of continual data? Would this be essentially a server with a built in switch?
In addition, if there was sufficiently high amounts of bandwith for everyone, would you have to monitor anything other than variants of DDOS or other distributed attacks that use multiple pcs? If everyone on the planet had a 1 or 2GB/S down and upstream connection (think perhaps 10,20,30 years down the road I have no idea how long really), would it matter what else slows down the internet connection on their PC's?
Considering that this stuff was doing 10 GB in 2005, to see 100 in 2007 is a pretty nice upgrade...my question is, given that the speeds are increasing, will we see any of this as consumers in the US? Not a "providers suck" (which we already know), but more of a "will this potentially make connections cheaper"?
I believe that the issues have been covered by everyone overall.
To summarize, its all the same circular issues:
Lack of competition, stupid people willing to pay extremely high demand and not seek quality, and rediculous lock-in contracts which most people don't have the common sense to know how to get out of (there are many ways). Most consumers don't even know the gov't passed a law some years back to make it legal to unlock your phone and yet people willingly let themselves stay locked in. Not to mention you can use roaming to cancel your plan without fees or cancel due to them changing the plan without your authorization (a letter doesn't count as an "okay, go ahead").
The next problem is that even with such things, most providers have no competition, and still manage to lock people in due to stupidity. There's a lack of choice and excess of charges. Remember that USF charge? People are still being charged for that under a different name. (cnet news.com link)
you were the one who said first about the price: "This means high barrier of entry." Of course depending on how you take it, you could make a "stream of money" off renting the place, via raising your rent prices continually and letting the equity of the place increase on its own. New places equity tends to be equal to what you put into the place. Engineers and people who build homes and then rent them actually do make a living off that. Single homes if they're big enough can indeed do that.
So as you said yourself Yes, you can make money with real estate, I know that, you know that, people got rich doing exatcly that. you just answered your own statement and argument, in context. That statement proves you had nothing to say in the first place. I'm no longer replying to you.
okay I'm going to put this in plain for you. You don't have enormous assets to invest. So you don't have enormous profits to gain. You can make money to supplement your income but unless you make an enormous amount to invest then you simply don't have a right or reason to be able to make your entire income off renting 1 place unless its like a 100 room condo. You have your rights, but your money only has a certain amount of value. I've seen people take a 150k place, invest, and turn around to be making 20% a year in profit. It only took them 5 years to turn the place around, and they can make a living off just renting but choose to make more income. Also, can you stop contradicting yourself? Selling is part of renting just like buying is. Otherwise you're not talking about anything involving real estate since there is more involved than strictly renting. Once again, if you can stop digging your head in the sand over the idea, maybe you should look into how people indeed make a ton off what becomes just rental fees.
You just contradicted yourself and wasted my time. Go look it up on your own or ask somebody. The basic concept is you put 20% down to mortgage, you make about a 10-20% spread on the place via rent (per year after costs etc), you pay about 10% or less interest rate, and when or if you sell the place off you could lose or gain money depending on the place. Sheesh man, I'm 24 and know how this stuff works. You are obviously older than I am, and by definition "older people are supposed to be smarter". Go read a book on real estate or something. Also what's high barrier of entry @ 20%? You know if the investment is so big maybe other people would split it with you, assuming a large place the percentage values remain the same or higher if its in a prime area.
umm, you can rent at significant profits and start small, the method mentioned is why real estate can be a very profitable business, The risk is if people don't want the place/it loses its value you might not get back your initial investment.
However the opposite can occur, you can end up getting make more than you invested. I suggest you check out wiki's real estate link to get a better feel for real estate. Even in big cities it can turn a huge profit.
anyone have a mirror?
either pubpat has just been slashdotted or the link doesn't seem to work.
I read up on this company monsantore and it sounds like they're denying scientific fact that shows that the products they create are harmful for animal and human consumption. I'm just checking, was I inferring correct or am I misreading? I'm not a "save the world" kind of guy but isn't the whole point of getting something natural to, well, at least try to create things More natural as opposed to less?
I called comcast earlier as my friend can access the site but I cannot, and he lives a mile north of me.
I believe there is a lot more going on here than what is mentioned, comcast said that it was an AT&T link to the backbone that was refusing connections. I don't know a ton about networking but it seems to be back and functional now, and earlier when I would tracert the IP down was 12.116.17.7, if that helps you guys to peek at what it is.
short answer: no
long answer: there are always new developments that require access to superior technology both on a professional/business/university level and further down the line as such things as indie music labels/movie producers, programmers, graphic designers, and for many people in such groups they can afford said technology to further it's development. The burden seems more on the designers of the processors than on the consumers.
so the end justifies the means?
people who have not done anything wrong are getting SHIAT on by their provider...oh and I'd give it about 3 days before someone hammers the hell out of cox in response.
I hate to say it, but that really proves not as much that "The only way advertisers can get accurate data as people opt in", as it proves that they have not elected to find new methods to track data properly/independantly.
If you were able to develop a way to get honest and accurate data of the number of hits on a site to site basis, would even that be more accurate? (assuming you started to collect an enormous list of sites). Say check all the news aggregator websites language by language (I'm sure there's thousands in each), but rank them by who is getting the most unique hits in a day, etc? Of course a site could skew their own results which creates its own problem but would this not at least be more valuable than alexa data?
Call me crazy (or shirley), but isn't this what cellphones that don't use T9 do? How is that faster? Wouldn't some sort of T9 on a PDA work better?/logic
Slashdot Mirror
truthfully, we have all been waiting for the riaa to shoot themselves in the foot, and it looks like congress is going to encourage them to do so, from the summary. However, the initial costs of that are probably going to suck, with a lot of good radio sites likely going to shut down (pandora, di.fm, stuff like that)....but at least the ensuing result is certain things will hopefully change in concerns to this you can't allow people to choose what to play off your playlist law. The unfortunate side is "hopefully" and also praying that we don't have some kind of RIAA sponsored payola to bring about crappy music streaming stations that they support.
will it run firefox?
and:
will it run adblock in firefox?
let me jump right on that bandwagon! oh by the way, did I mention that for $300 more dollars that you can give us more of your dollars in a safe, affordable transaction, you can get vista business edition via giving us more of your dollars?
Interesting. Do you have some wiki links or something for my edification of these ultrasonic devices and the other things you referenced, also to back them up? I had no luck searching any of them via google. Thanks.
This sand you refer to, is this warm sand? Haha.
I think you may be overthinking how such a plate would work. In no means does it have to be sensitive enough for you to notice the pressure in any fashion at all. Think how pressure plates work for vehicles at intersections, fast food restaurants, etc. Same idea but generating power from it. Standing on one of those plates you wouldn't notice that it's there or not with no difference than the cement next to it. Also if the plate had an extremely small amount of give that would actually be better on your feet for prolonged priods. Someone could take it a step further and even use water pressure underneath a layer of cement to create a sort of hydroelectric power if it was equally efficient.
I don't think using people for electricity is exactly wonderful but this method isn't "suspicious", its more like the concept of using solar power. However I don't like some corporation abusing our presence to benefit without our consent or even knowledge.
I've seen arguments for both sides, but I have to say that this is crazy. After reading the article, I find it a bit odd that people don't read the implications of this beyond their nose in front of them. I would say the only allowance to tap this database would be search warrants, there needs to be a lot of restriction on this or completely trash the idea...otherwise I'd say we have an equal right to cover our license plates with reflective things to make it impossible to read.
Like someone had mentioned, the last thing we need is another place where people can appropriate where you drive with "representing yourself", aka abuse of this data can run very rampant.
How far reaching is this? It seems from the article that this is "guilt by association" as well. FTA: "The rules apply any to broadcasts or rebroadcasts in any medium."
Overall I'm mixed, but honestly this could be somewhat entertaining, I'm curious to if they'll keep the original style or "improve". It was like futurama gone cgi with some creative ideas in it. Plus wasn't this like somewhat breakthrough animation back in the early cgi days of Reboot, Beast Wars, all that stuff?
Is it me or does this smell like some sort of backtracking and/or that someone may have educated the school about their rights a little?
read about this on my wii last night Be careful. If you read too much on your wii you could go blind!
This article about DRM limiting storage is one example of one of Tivo's problems....basically the device can store anything for as long as you want but due to restrictive DRM you can be limited on if you can store what you have stored, indefinitely (remember fair use issues).
Sorry thats all I can find without taking forever to research, also perhaps Tivo preventing skipping (drm lock) would also be relevant. Oh and I found the original limiting storage article
Personally I'm all for Tivo but in reality spending 50$ on a HD tuner card and 150$ on a 500gig+ hard drive to use in a PC seems better for recording/control/etc. However I hope this shows some problems with Tivo that are DRM related, including the bugs last year that you mentioned.
From Alfresco.com:
Prior to Alfresco, Asay co-founded Novell®'s Linux Business Office in 2002 and was an early agitator and architect for the company's shift to open source. In 2003 Asay founded the Open Source Business Conference, the industry's premier open source strategy event, and has served as an Entreprenuer-in-Residence for Thomas Weisel Venture Partners, focusing on open source investment opportunities. Before Novell, Asay was General Manager at Lineo®, an embedded Linux software startup, where he ran Lineo's Residential Gateway business.
If anyone's wondering who Lineo is, its Caldera AKA SCO GROUP . How does someone this biased manage to make it on CNET? Can someone explain that to me please?
I am not trying to rationalize this but as computing power increases doesn't the capability to handle a larger data stream become realistic or no? I'm looking it this from a fairly simple perspective.
Also isn't someone already having to handle such streams? Don't tier 1 networks have to be able to handle far more than such things already? What about the likes of Google or MSFT perhaps? (not that it means that it's viable for the rest of the world). In another thread with similar questions(but not the ones I pose here) I mentioned a similar idea and people expressed that it is not difficult to handle large amounts of traffic, the idea seems circular once again.
Can you give me a general idea of how much bandwith a computer could handle and/or what type of computer? Being someone who has never worked in such security I have no quantifiable idea of how much processing is needed. Would this be like a dual 8core pc with 16gigs of ram can handle 1/2 a GB of continual data? Would this be essentially a server with a built in switch?
In addition, if there was sufficiently high amounts of bandwith for everyone, would you have to monitor anything other than variants of DDOS or other distributed attacks that use multiple pcs? If everyone on the planet had a 1 or 2GB/S down and upstream connection (think perhaps 10,20,30 years down the road I have no idea how long really), would it matter what else slows down the internet connection on their PC's?
Considering that this stuff was doing 10 GB in 2005, to see 100 in 2007 is a pretty nice upgrade...my question is, given that the speeds are increasing, will we see any of this as consumers in the US? Not a "providers suck" (which we already know), but more of a "will this potentially make connections cheaper"?
To summarize, its all the same circular issues:
Lack of competition, stupid people willing to pay extremely high demand and not seek quality, and rediculous lock-in contracts which most people don't have the common sense to know how to get out of (there are many ways). Most consumers don't even know the gov't passed a law some years back to make it legal to unlock your phone and yet people willingly let themselves stay locked in. Not to mention you can use roaming to cancel your plan without fees or cancel due to them changing the plan without your authorization (a letter doesn't count as an "okay, go ahead").
The next problem is that even with such things, most providers have no competition, and still manage to lock people in due to stupidity. There's a lack of choice and excess of charges. Remember that USF charge? People are still being charged for that under a different name. (cnet news.com link)
you were the one who said first about the price: "This means high barrier of entry." Of course depending on how you take it, you could make a "stream of money" off renting the place, via raising your rent prices continually and letting the equity of the place increase on its own. New places equity tends to be equal to what you put into the place. Engineers and people who build homes and then rent them actually do make a living off that. Single homes if they're big enough can indeed do that.
So as you said yourself Yes, you can make money with real estate, I know that, you know that, people got rich doing exatcly that. you just answered your own statement and argument, in context. That statement proves you had nothing to say in the first place. I'm no longer replying to you.
okay I'm going to put this in plain for you. You don't have enormous assets to invest. So you don't have enormous profits to gain. You can make money to supplement your income but unless you make an enormous amount to invest then you simply don't have a right or reason to be able to make your entire income off renting 1 place unless its like a 100 room condo. You have your rights, but your money only has a certain amount of value. I've seen people take a 150k place, invest, and turn around to be making 20% a year in profit. It only took them 5 years to turn the place around, and they can make a living off just renting but choose to make more income. Also, can you stop contradicting yourself? Selling is part of renting just like buying is. Otherwise you're not talking about anything involving real estate since there is more involved than strictly renting. Once again, if you can stop digging your head in the sand over the idea, maybe you should look into how people indeed make a ton off what becomes just rental fees.
You just contradicted yourself and wasted my time. Go look it up on your own or ask somebody. The basic concept is you put 20% down to mortgage, you make about a 10-20% spread on the place via rent (per year after costs etc), you pay about 10% or less interest rate, and when or if you sell the place off you could lose or gain money depending on the place. Sheesh man, I'm 24 and know how this stuff works. You are obviously older than I am, and by definition "older people are supposed to be smarter". Go read a book on real estate or something. Also what's high barrier of entry @ 20%? You know if the investment is so big maybe other people would split it with you, assuming a large place the percentage values remain the same or higher if its in a prime area.
However the opposite can occur, you can end up getting make more than you invested. I suggest you check out wiki's real estate link to get a better feel for real estate. Even in big cities it can turn a huge profit.
I read up on this company monsantore and it sounds like they're denying scientific fact that shows that the products they create are harmful for animal and human consumption. I'm just checking, was I inferring correct or am I misreading? I'm not a "save the world" kind of guy but isn't the whole point of getting something natural to, well, at least try to create things More natural as opposed to less?
I called comcast earlier as my friend can access the site but I cannot, and he lives a mile north of me.
I believe there is a lot more going on here than what is mentioned, comcast said that it was an AT&T link to the backbone that was refusing connections. I don't know a ton about networking but it seems to be back and functional now, and earlier when I would tracert the IP down was 12.116.17.7, if that helps you guys to peek at what it is.
short answer: no
long answer: there are always new developments that require access to superior technology both on a professional/business/university level and further down the line as such things as indie music labels/movie producers, programmers, graphic designers, and for many people in such groups they can afford said technology to further it's development. The burden seems more on the designers of the processors than on the consumers.
so the end justifies the means? people who have not done anything wrong are getting SHIAT on by their provider...oh and I'd give it about 3 days before someone hammers the hell out of cox in response.
I hate to say it, but that really proves not as much that "The only way advertisers can get accurate data as people opt in", as it proves that they have not elected to find new methods to track data properly/independantly. If you were able to develop a way to get honest and accurate data of the number of hits on a site to site basis, would even that be more accurate? (assuming you started to collect an enormous list of sites). Say check all the news aggregator websites language by language (I'm sure there's thousands in each), but rank them by who is getting the most unique hits in a day, etc? Of course a site could skew their own results which creates its own problem but would this not at least be more valuable than alexa data?
Call me crazy (or shirley), but isn't this what cellphones that don't use T9 do? How is that faster? Wouldn't some sort of T9 on a PDA work better? /logic