The great minds of our civilization, notwithstanding - our entire society was built by groups. The solo accomplishments of Einstein, Newton and other great inventors and philosophers are fine and all, but their accomplishments are pretty meaningless if there wasn't a social group to benefit from them.
Internet broadcasters have problems because bandwidth cost money. For an internet broadcaster, the more popular you become, the larger your overhead in bandwidth costs.
In my experience in running and internet radio station (idobi Radio), i have to weight advertising the station against our ability to support new listeners. A successful campaign means we double our listeners, but it also means we have to allocate bandwidth to support those listeners. Advertising income does not yet match internet radio listenership, and depending on instream advertising to pay for your station is currently a losing proposition.
One of the best reason is that you might actually hear a new band you've never heard of before - or maybe hear something from a band you like that you've forgotten about.
That's what we try to do at idobi Radio. Check it out if you're into the alt/rock thing. (yeah, that was a blatant plug)
Existing laws would, for a time, protect current intellectual rights holder. You would be legally forbidden to copy a car, because of patents or trademarks. However, if replicators were a reality, the capitalist system would collapse, where the only valuable commodity would be energy production, and the mining and manufacturing of materials required to create replicators.
Finally, there would be a debate as to what, if any restrictions should be placed on what should be replicated. Should inventors of new and useful products that can be replicated be financially rewarded. Is there any reason to financially reward anyone in a world where everyone can replicate anything they want?
Would our civilization even survive when we no longer even need to gather and hunt for our survival? What would we do with our time?
The economics have changed profoundly, from increase income of attorneys scrambling to protect intellectual property to the decrease in income of professional photographers in competition with anyone with a digital camera...
Copyrights exist in relation our current economic model. In a world of replicators, the economic engine that drives the world would drastically change, so the foundation of your question is meaningless.
Except that it's my company, and if I don't enjoy working here, and my employees don't enjoy working here, then I don't see the point. Overhead costs are part of doing business, and so long as we're profitible, the cleaners stay.
Again, i was addressing your original premise that "hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole". In our case, it very much was... and for the majority of small businesses - nearly half of all businesses in the us employ < 500 people - hires such as these are considered overhead, not production.
Except that it's my company, and if I don't enjoy working here, and my employees don't enjoy working here, then I don't see the point. Overhead costs are part of doing business, and so long as we're profitible, the cleaners stay.
Again, i was addressing your original premise that "hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole". In our case, it very much was... and for the majority of small businesses - nearly half of all businesses in the us employ
I'm sorry, but your original premise is that hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole. The hiring of overhead staff is based on how much money the business earns as a whole. It determines whether it is more economical to have a staff or to outsource the work. The real word is not cold hard equation that must balance in the favor of maximized profits. Maximum productivity is not the ultimate goal.
Why would you hire someone for $3/hr when they only produce $2/hr of productivity? Because having someone else take out the trash and vacuuming the carpet increases employee morale. In our small but not that small business, the $240/month overhead for a cleaning crew means that our employees can goof off some indeterminate hours every month.
Does our budget allow for a cleaning crew? yes.
Did our productivity increase? not in any measurable profit.
Not all jobs create production. Cleaning staff, secretaries, even teachers don't produce income for a business. But they are valuable. Such jobs are part of a business overhead.
You obviously haven't used Camera Raw and Bridge. It's a pain in the ass. If you're familiar with the product, take a look at Apple's demo and see if it isn't a leap in usability and interface.
It's a totally different product. Photoshop doesn't have anywhere near the workflow that Aperature provides. Non destructive RAW processing, applying exposure processing to multiple files, and desktop organization is a godsend for professional photographers.
The average cost of nuclear power (2004) is 1.68 cents per kilowatt.
Coal is $1.90/kilowatt, Oil is $5.39/kilowatt, and Gas is $5.87/kilowatt.
This might make sense for Russia though, since it would preserve their oil, which is a major cash export for them.
Slashdot Mirror
The great minds of our civilization, notwithstanding - our entire society was built by groups. The solo accomplishments of Einstein, Newton and other great inventors and philosophers are fine and all, but their accomplishments are pretty meaningless if there wasn't a social group to benefit from them.
already?
Internet broadcasters have problems because bandwidth cost money. For an internet broadcaster, the more popular you become, the larger your overhead in bandwidth costs.
In my experience in running and internet radio station (idobi Radio), i have to weight advertising the station against our ability to support new listeners. A successful campaign means we double our listeners, but it also means we have to allocate bandwidth to support those listeners. Advertising income does not yet match internet radio listenership, and depending on instream advertising to pay for your station is currently a losing proposition.
If anyone has ideas, I'm open to them.
One of the best reason is that you might actually hear a new band you've never heard of before - or maybe hear something from a band you like that you've forgotten about.
That's what we try to do at idobi Radio. Check it out if you're into the alt/rock thing. (yeah, that was a blatant plug)
No, it's just proof that UK Academy members are toothless, and their votes don't really matter anyways...
If you don't see any real changes, then you're just not looking hard enough. In monetary terms, information has become less valuable.
Existing laws would, for a time, protect current intellectual rights holder. You would be legally forbidden to copy a car, because of patents or trademarks. However, if replicators were a reality, the capitalist system would collapse, where the only valuable commodity would be energy production, and the mining and manufacturing of materials required to create replicators. Finally, there would be a debate as to what, if any restrictions should be placed on what should be replicated. Should inventors of new and useful products that can be replicated be financially rewarded. Is there any reason to financially reward anyone in a world where everyone can replicate anything they want? Would our civilization even survive when we no longer even need to gather and hunt for our survival? What would we do with our time?
The economics have changed profoundly, from increase income of attorneys scrambling to protect intellectual property to the decrease in income of professional photographers in competition with anyone with a digital camera...
Copyrights exist in relation our current economic model. In a world of replicators, the economic engine that drives the world would drastically change, so the foundation of your question is meaningless.
Except that it's my company, and if I don't enjoy working here, and my employees don't enjoy working here, then I don't see the point. Overhead costs are part of doing business, and so long as we're profitible, the cleaners stay.
Again, i was addressing your original premise that "hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole". In our case, it very much was... and for the majority of small businesses - nearly half of all businesses in the us employ < 500 people - hires such as these are considered overhead, not production.
Except that it's my company, and if I don't enjoy working here, and my employees don't enjoy working here, then I don't see the point. Overhead costs are part of doing business, and so long as we're profitible, the cleaners stay.
Again, i was addressing your original premise that "hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole". In our case, it very much was... and for the majority of small businesses - nearly half of all businesses in the us employ
I'm sorry, but your original premise is that hiring decisions is not based on how much money the business earns as a whole. The hiring of overhead staff is based on how much money the business earns as a whole. It determines whether it is more economical to have a staff or to outsource the work. The real word is not cold hard equation that must balance in the favor of maximized profits. Maximum productivity is not the ultimate goal.
Why would you hire someone for $3/hr when they only produce $2/hr of productivity? Because having someone else take out the trash and vacuuming the carpet increases employee morale. In our small but not that small business, the $240/month overhead for a cleaning crew means that our employees can goof off some indeterminate hours every month.
Does our budget allow for a cleaning crew? yes.
Did our productivity increase? not in any measurable profit.
Are we enjoying our time working. yes.
Not all jobs create production. Cleaning staff, secretaries, even teachers don't produce income for a business. But they are valuable. Such jobs are part of a business overhead.
See the actual police report and his statement @ http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1202052boy1.h tml
1% here, 1% there... pretty soon, the project is 300% over budget...
You obviously haven't used Camera Raw and Bridge. It's a pain in the ass. If you're familiar with the product, take a look at Apple's demo and see if it isn't a leap in usability and interface.
Not to mention that it can also be a warning to Adobe that Apple is ready to fill the void should Adobe drag their feet on OS X support.
It's a totally different product. Photoshop doesn't have anywhere near the workflow that Aperature provides. Non destructive RAW processing, applying exposure processing to multiple files, and desktop organization is a godsend for professional photographers.
Priests, Doctors and Lawyers have special privileges that are reserved for their profession.
Except to be a fair comparison, the picture should be more like this.
But we can always build levees to keep the city dry, right?
The average cost of nuclear power (2004) is 1.68 cents per kilowatt. Coal is $1.90/kilowatt, Oil is $5.39/kilowatt, and Gas is $5.87/kilowatt. This might make sense for Russia though, since it would preserve their oil, which is a major cash export for them.
Because if you word it: "a maximum of ten years", it would allow for someone to run for a third term, and serve two years before stepping down.
Regardless of your original intent, you also have the right to cash in on "A Good Thing"(tm)