It's an interesting idea, but what happens when you lose the file? Basically you are up the proverbial creek with no way back.
Suggesting you can get the file back off some p2p network is misleading. You have no guarantee that the file is exactly the same as the copy you had. So you are limited to files that you alone have. If you are careless with backups, or unthinkingly resample your MP3 or photo, then say goodbye to your unique hash.
It's all possible, but users of it would really need to get in the habit of considering, and treating, a particular file like a unique and valuable key. To be protected and kept secure at all costs. Once they do that it becomes easier for a third party to identify the file amongst all the others they may have.
Well,just off the top of my head,there is indie radio,Internet radio,and live video feeds.
How do you make money from these?
My point was there are plenty of people wailing "change you business model", "copyright is an artificial restriction" and "earn your money some other way". But very few have any suggestions on how these musicians should earn a living other than "tour, sell t-shirts". Fine if you're the kind of musician who plays music that works on a stage or a coffee-shop, and has fans who like tour t-shirts. But what of everyone else? And is this really the most productive way for musicians to spend their time and earn money from their fans? We're in the age of mass remote communications, but these guys have to earn a living trucking a piano about the world. This isn't a step forward, it's a step back to the 1950s.
I think going back to a more "carnival" atmosphere,with the bands having little booths to sell cds,t-shirts,keyrings,etc would work,and they would end up with a lot more money than selling themselves to a record company.
So basically you're saying that musicians should give up their job and become market stall holders, as there's more money to be made that way? Possibly true, but kind of misses the point. There are plenty of ways musicians can make money, but the point of specialisation is that you get the best out of people if they concentrate on what they're good at, and let other people do the other stuff.
And the major drawback to the usual "let them tour" argument is that not all music works in a touring situation. Not all bands are three guitars and a drum-kit that can be thrown in the back of a van. Not all music can be appreciated sitting next to 1000 strangers in a big hall. Not all music fans buy band t-shirts.
Good point. I'm sure I read a discussion on slashdot years ago that predicted exactly this scenario. Lazy or stupid subscribers will choose to stop getting emails simply by clicking the "This is spam" button. Means they don't have to read the unsubscribe instructions on the email and involves minimal effort on their part.
But it's time for people to move on. Email is not the way to mass distribute information. Apart from spam ruining it for everyone, it's really inefficient. Use newsfeeds.
Digital music and the internet removes any artificial barrier the music/movie industry has traditionally held
What was "artificial" about it? They recorded the music/movie. They made the physical records/CDs/tapes/DVDs. They owned them, they were physically in their possession. If you want one, then you buy one from them. Seems about as natural as you can get in a free-market system.
Now you can debate all you want about how removing the physical aspect from things has changed things. But the point remains that it is the industry that recorded the music/movie. You can take control of the distribution channels, but if you're not paying anyone to make the music/movie, pretty soon you've got nothing to distribute. And right now I don't see any mechanism in P2P torrents that facilitates paying the people who make the music/movie.
And no, having a vague idea that they'll somehow get paid some other time, by some one else, possibly for something else, maybe, is not a solution.
Not "invade". Sheesh, keep to the script why dontcha?!
Act 1: Locate & Destroy Secret Inter-planetary WMDs Act 2: Er, forget that, we never said that, we meant; Liberate oppressed Saturnians Act 3: Confuse Saturn For Something Jupiter Did - Meh, they're all gas-giants aren't they? Act 4: Ooh, fancy that, you have oil? That we did not know. Act 5: Damn Ungrateful Tentacle-heads
we hadn't seen what was really possible with computers yet.
By that logic, neither have current teenagers.
Of course text based games are way simpler than what they can play on their PS3. But that's not really the point. It'll be their text based game. Same way a child's first drawing is way simpler than Pixar's Wall-E. That isn't a reason to not draw another.
Write a game, perhaps based on a favourite book. Or something that involves a subject he's already interested. Doesn't matter if it's a simple text game. Let him write it on his own. Then when he's finished suggest a few improvements. Repeat. Once he's bored with that, start a new project.
That's how I learnt.
And for pity sake, do not ask him to kernel hack. It's way too abstract. You need something user-level with immediate and very visible results.
Seconded! The summary and article only talks about the acronym and gives zero indication to what it is, never mind explaining why it's a bad thing. Apparently we're supposed to know all that.
It would be a different issue if this was an IT acronym. But it's an American political one. If you want to use it on slashdot you should at least try and explain what the hell it is.
I don't disagree, converting to sound is a useful process for representing what would otherwise be invisible to our senses. A lot of our understanding of science revolves around models like this. But we need to appreciate that they are only models.
Dumping your model straight back into reality and speculating what the results may be is just nonsense that suggests you've no understand of what the underlying phenomenon actually is, just the misguided idea that the model is the reality.
If I converted the peaks of mountains into a sound wave, then played it back at a pitch related to population density, I would have a fair audio representation of geographical data. It would probably also sound horrible. But would I then be correct in suggesting that Switzerland emits an ear-splitting noise that might upset Italy? I don't think so.
If you take any kind of electro-magnetic wave and arbitrarily convert it to sound waves using a formula you've just made up, then amazingly it's going to sound awful. But the idea that the Earth is emitting "sound" that aliens may find "ear piercing" is misleading garbage.
This suggestion, like most of copyright "avoidance" schemes, always remind me of the sort of smart-ass schemes you tried to pull when you were a teenager. Being a smart-ass teenager you'd read the letter of the rules laid down by your parents/teachers and then devise a way of circumvent them so that technically, technically, you weren't breaking any. The fact that you were clearly breaking the spirit of the rules was something you hoped would go unnoticed if you were caught. You'd play all innocent and present a detailed smart-ass analysis of the rules that you technically weren't breaking.
Of course, what happened is that your parents/teachers saw right through the whole scheme and knew damn well that you knew you were breaking the rules. Amazingly, you'd get punished all the same, and doubly so for being a smart-ass.
Exactly like this will.
But what's sad to see is all this inventiveness going to waste on immature reasoning that'll get laughed out of any court. Sharing copyright material can be done by any technically insane lengths you like. But if the end result is the same then it really doesn't matter how smart-ass you've been in doing it.
"But over 60% of non-computing students do not wish to enter the sector because they think it will be boring."
Who cares what non-computing students think? I can think of dozens of other job sectors that I suspect would bore me stupid, that's why I had the sense not to study for qualifications in them.
I suspect that these graduates all have a nasty shock coming to them anyway, courtesy of real life. Most jobs are "boring" in some way. That's why you get paid to do them rather than doing them for fun.
None of which is the point. Sure your wife/license-bearing can pick up the slack, but they still lose out. They're having to do all the driving you used to do. My point still stands. You were the one being punished, but your family suffers too. It's part of what a responsible spouse/partner/father is supposed to consider before they do illegal stuff.
So your wife/teen is now responsible for the driving you used to do. They have to do the school run. They have to drive you to work. They have to fetch the timber to fix the back fence. They lose again.
You lose your driving licence after repeated speeding; that's your car grounded for three years, a resource used by the whole household.
You get a fine for parking illegally; that's money that otherwise could've redecorated the kitchen, a resource used by the whole family.
You get communal service for being drunk and disorderly; that's your evenings tied up for the next six months, time you could have otherwise spent helping your children with homework.
Punishing you inevitably affects your family, it can't be helped. That's something you're supposed to take into consideration before you commit the crime.
Nope, not like the Middle Ages, just blatantly obvious. Name any punishment for any crime that doesn't also in some way adversely affect the criminal's family.
The greatest flamebait article would be a comparison of coding skills by nationality, involving lots of of crass stereotypes. It'd be a far bigger train wreck in record time.
I mean seriously, have you any idea the percentage of Greenlander coders out there? Their code has the advantage of twice as big on the schema as it is in reality. That's got to make them great coders, doesn't it? We need more of them.
I particularly liked the "There's a big need to fix testosterone-fueled code at Ingres because only about 20% of the engineers are women"
Cos we all know that testosterone is bad, and women engineers are all better because, well, they're not mad things driven by their hormones, like silly men.
Basically the woman is a fool with an agenda (women into computing) so is constructing a theory to fit the purpose using crass gender stereotypes. There are good coders who document and comment clearly. There are good coders who don't, but should. There are rotten coders who both do and don't document and comment clearly. But any attempt to assign any of the former attributes to gender specifics is pathetic, and more than a little worrying for someone who, I presume, is responsible for employing people under present gender discrimination laws. If I worked for her I would more than a little annoyed at being patronised and my coding style & skills being categorized by gender.
Sounds like a very reasonable way of promoting and selling music. You get to hear a song as much as you like for 10 cents, if you like it enough you get to take it away, DRM free, for another 79 cents.
Of course, this is just the kind of marketing that kdawson doesn't want to hear about. Much easier to continue whining about the nasty record companies not giving customers what they want, and forcing people to file share.
Note from developer here. Just a quick note to let you know we don't care if you would buy more games if the prices were lower. We make more money by selling fewer games at a higher price.
But thanks for letting us know.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an interesting idea, but what happens when you lose the file? Basically you are up the proverbial creek with no way back.
Suggesting you can get the file back off some p2p network is misleading. You have no guarantee that the file is exactly the same as the copy you had. So you are limited to files that you alone have. If you are careless with backups, or unthinkingly resample your MP3 or photo, then say goodbye to your unique hash.
It's all possible, but users of it would really need to get in the habit of considering, and treating, a particular file like a unique and valuable key. To be protected and kept secure at all costs. Once they do that it becomes easier for a third party to identify the file amongst all the others they may have.
Well,just off the top of my head,there is indie radio,Internet radio,and live video feeds.
How do you make money from these?
My point was there are plenty of people wailing "change you business model", "copyright is an artificial restriction" and "earn your money some other way". But very few have any suggestions on how these musicians should earn a living other than "tour, sell t-shirts". Fine if you're the kind of musician who plays music that works on a stage or a coffee-shop, and has fans who like tour t-shirts. But what of everyone else? And is this really the most productive way for musicians to spend their time and earn money from their fans? We're in the age of mass remote communications, but these guys have to earn a living trucking a piano about the world. This isn't a step forward, it's a step back to the 1950s.
I'd like a card that says;
"I do not have a customer 'loyalty' card. No, I do not want a customer 'loyalty' card."
Would save me hours of wasted time in the average year. Can I patent this idea?
I think going back to a more "carnival" atmosphere,with the bands having little booths to sell cds,t-shirts,keyrings,etc would work,and they would end up with a lot more money than selling themselves to a record company.
So basically you're saying that musicians should give up their job and become market stall holders, as there's more money to be made that way? Possibly true, but kind of misses the point. There are plenty of ways musicians can make money, but the point of specialisation is that you get the best out of people if they concentrate on what they're good at, and let other people do the other stuff.
And the major drawback to the usual "let them tour" argument is that not all music works in a touring situation. Not all bands are three guitars and a drum-kit that can be thrown in the back of a van. Not all music can be appreciated sitting next to 1000 strangers in a big hall. Not all music fans buy band t-shirts.
Good point. I'm sure I read a discussion on slashdot years ago that predicted exactly this scenario. Lazy or stupid subscribers will choose to stop getting emails simply by clicking the "This is spam" button. Means they don't have to read the unsubscribe instructions on the email and involves minimal effort on their part.
But it's time for people to move on. Email is not the way to mass distribute information. Apart from spam ruining it for everyone, it's really inefficient. Use newsfeeds.
Digital music and the internet removes any artificial barrier the music/movie industry has traditionally held
What was "artificial" about it? They recorded the music/movie. They made the physical records/CDs/tapes/DVDs. They owned them, they were physically in their possession. If you want one, then you buy one from them. Seems about as natural as you can get in a free-market system.
Now you can debate all you want about how removing the physical aspect from things has changed things. But the point remains that it is the industry that recorded the music/movie. You can take control of the distribution channels, but if you're not paying anyone to make the music/movie, pretty soon you've got nothing to distribute. And right now I don't see any mechanism in P2P torrents that facilitates paying the people who make the music/movie.
And no, having a vague idea that they'll somehow get paid some other time, by some one else, possibly for something else, maybe, is not a solution.
Not "invade". Sheesh, keep to the script why dontcha?!
Act 1: Locate & Destroy Secret Inter-planetary WMDs
Act 2: Er, forget that, we never said that, we meant; Liberate oppressed Saturnians
Act 3: Confuse Saturn For Something Jupiter Did - Meh, they're all gas-giants aren't they?
Act 4: Ooh, fancy that, you have oil? That we did not know.
Act 5: Damn Ungrateful Tentacle-heads
we hadn't seen what was really possible with computers yet.
By that logic, neither have current teenagers.
Of course text based games are way simpler than what they can play on their PS3. But that's not really the point. It'll be their text based game. Same way a child's first drawing is way simpler than Pixar's Wall-E. That isn't a reason to not draw another.
Write a game, perhaps based on a favourite book. Or something that involves a subject he's already interested. Doesn't matter if it's a simple text game. Let him write it on his own. Then when he's finished suggest a few improvements. Repeat. Once he's bored with that, start a new project.
That's how I learnt.
And for pity sake, do not ask him to kernel hack. It's way too abstract. You need something user-level with immediate and very visible results.
Seconded! The summary and article only talks about the acronym and gives zero indication to what it is, never mind explaining why it's a bad thing. Apparently we're supposed to know all that.
It would be a different issue if this was an IT acronym. But it's an American political one. If you want to use it on slashdot you should at least try and explain what the hell it is.
Could someone provide a translation of the summary for those of us who speak English rather than promotional BS? .. on second thoughts, never mind.
Data is not scare though.
Bandwidth, however, is. Your analysis is looking at totally the wrong measure.
I don't disagree, converting to sound is a useful process for representing what would otherwise be invisible to our senses. A lot of our understanding of science revolves around models like this. But we need to appreciate that they are only models.
Dumping your model straight back into reality and speculating what the results may be is just nonsense that suggests you've no understand of what the underlying phenomenon actually is, just the misguided idea that the model is the reality.
If I converted the peaks of mountains into a sound wave, then played it back at a pitch related to population density, I would have a fair audio representation of geographical data. It would probably also sound horrible. But would I then be correct in suggesting that Switzerland emits an ear-splitting noise that might upset Italy? I don't think so.
If you take any kind of electro-magnetic wave and arbitrarily convert it to sound waves using a formula you've just made up, then amazingly it's going to sound awful. But the idea that the Earth is emitting "sound" that aliens may find "ear piercing" is misleading garbage.
This suggestion, like most of copyright "avoidance" schemes, always remind me of the sort of smart-ass schemes you tried to pull when you were a teenager. Being a smart-ass teenager you'd read the letter of the rules laid down by your parents/teachers and then devise a way of circumvent them so that technically, technically, you weren't breaking any. The fact that you were clearly breaking the spirit of the rules was something you hoped would go unnoticed if you were caught. You'd play all innocent and present a detailed smart-ass analysis of the rules that you technically weren't breaking.
Of course, what happened is that your parents/teachers saw right through the whole scheme and knew damn well that you knew you were breaking the rules. Amazingly, you'd get punished all the same, and doubly so for being a smart-ass.
Exactly like this will.
But what's sad to see is all this inventiveness going to waste on immature reasoning that'll get laughed out of any court. Sharing copyright material can be done by any technically insane lengths you like. But if the end result is the same then it really doesn't matter how smart-ass you've been in doing it.
"But over 60% of non-computing students do not wish to enter the sector because they think it will be boring."
Who cares what non-computing students think? I can think of dozens of other job sectors that I suspect would bore me stupid, that's why I had the sense not to study for qualifications in them.
I suspect that these graduates all have a nasty shock coming to them anyway, courtesy of real life. Most jobs are "boring" in some way. That's why you get paid to do them rather than doing them for fun.
None of which is the point. Sure your wife/license-bearing can pick up the slack, but they still lose out. They're having to do all the driving you used to do. My point still stands. You were the one being punished, but your family suffers too. It's part of what a responsible spouse/partner/father is supposed to consider before they do illegal stuff.
So your wife/teen is now responsible for the driving you used to do. They have to do the school run. They have to drive you to work. They have to fetch the timber to fix the back fence. They lose again.
You lose your driving licence after repeated speeding; that's your car grounded for three years, a resource used by the whole household.
You get a fine for parking illegally; that's money that otherwise could've redecorated the kitchen, a resource used by the whole family.
You get communal service for being drunk and disorderly; that's your evenings tied up for the next six months, time you could have otherwise spent helping your children with homework.
Punishing you inevitably affects your family, it can't be helped. That's something you're supposed to take into consideration before you commit the crime.
Seriously, did any home users code on an Atari ST in the UK??? Its BASIC sucked and other languages cost extra.
Real coders learnt on the Spectrum or Beeb.
Nope, not like the Middle Ages, just blatantly obvious. Name any punishment for any crime that doesn't also in some way adversely affect the criminal's family.
Cos I can't think of one.
Not quite!
The greatest flamebait article would be a comparison of coding skills by nationality, involving lots of of crass stereotypes. It'd be a far bigger train wreck in record time.
I mean seriously, have you any idea the percentage of Greenlander coders out there? Their code has the advantage of twice as big on the schema as it is in reality. That's got to make them great coders, doesn't it? We need more of them.
I particularly liked the "There's a big need to fix testosterone-fueled code at Ingres because only about 20% of the engineers are women"
Cos we all know that testosterone is bad, and women engineers are all better because, well, they're not mad things driven by their hormones, like silly men.
Basically the woman is a fool with an agenda (women into computing) so is constructing a theory to fit the purpose using crass gender stereotypes. There are good coders who document and comment clearly. There are good coders who don't, but should. There are rotten coders who both do and don't document and comment clearly. But any attempt to assign any of the former attributes to gender specifics is pathetic, and more than a little worrying for someone who, I presume, is responsible for employing people under present gender discrimination laws. If I worked for her I would more than a little annoyed at being patronised and my coding style & skills being categorized by gender.
Sounds like a very reasonable way of promoting and selling music. You get to hear a song as much as you like for 10 cents, if you like it enough you get to take it away, DRM free, for another 79 cents.
Of course, this is just the kind of marketing that kdawson doesn't want to hear about. Much easier to continue whining about the nasty record companies not giving customers what they want, and forcing people to file share.
Note from developer here. Just a quick note to let you know we don't care if you would buy more games if the prices were lower. We make more money by selling fewer games at a higher price. But thanks for letting us know.