... to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced.
Translation: the federal government/current administration has to approve of the way you handle controversial views. What could possibly go wrong?
I would have thought that radio broadcasting would have somewhat similar rights to the freedom of the press. The "Fairness Doctrine" seems to challenge that idea.
Hehe, touche... on the other hand, it's possible to play quietly. But who wants "quiet" nowadays besides the old boring classical music types;) (that would be me.)
Hum. Yes, digital recordings of a piano... it's hard to distinguish a keyboard from a piano, but I'm not sure if that's just the way it's recorded or what. If comparing digital recordings to digital instruments then yeah, it's almost the same medium to begin with I guess:) Your explanation of the string vibration thing is one of the reasons I would think it would be quite difficult to realistically digitally model...
Yeah, you can get pretty cheap trumpets. Poor quality? Yes.... but you can still learn pretty much all the basics, you won't hurt yourself, and it'd be more versatile than a glove. The glove is missing some player input that the player does with his or her lips, tongue, and air... e.g., articulation (how hard to attack the note, how long to hold it, even how to end the note - end it by stopping air flow at the throat or end it by stopping air flow with the tongue? makes a different sound on the trumpet).
I guess I would put it this way.... to me, as a trumpet (and bass guitar, anyways:) ) player, among other instruments, I would see a single "glove" instrument functioning as a trumpet roughly the same you might see a "Guitar Hero" [toy] guitar functioning as a real guitar. You may be able to get it to sound the same in some ways, but it's missing a whole lot:D:)
My post was condemning said Colosseum-Complex, not condoning.
I actually didn't watch any videos or anything, nor seen any pics aside from the apparent hoax ones that pop up in ads and whatnot. I have no desire to see the blood or even watch outtakes, videos of him watching TV, etc. Again, I was attempting to explain what people were "missing" and then attempting to condemn it. I never thought me calling it a Colosseum-Complex would actually be understood to somehow be a positive condition...:)
Apparently, I was confused as supporting or "having" what I termed the "Colosseum-Complex" (if some psychiatrist(s) used that term in the past, I was unaware). I do not support it; I don't "want" to see Osama's death pictures, I didn't click the "EXCLUSIVE OSAMA GETTING SHOT VIDEO!!!11" Facebook links, etc. I was stating that I think western culture is enthralled with violence as a show... and I think that's bad, not good. Cheering at someone else's death... could be ok, I guess. I think Osama was a pretty bad man and some sense of relief seems ethical based on his death, and that relief may be expressed in cheering. However, it can easily become a "revenge" thing. Which I don't think is good.
This. It's hard to criticize a company for users who are ignorant or stupid (the former is understandable; the latter isn't). Statistics that are generic like this COULD point to something... but they might not, too. For example, if I came up with a statistic that said that Ford cars were crashed 10% more often than Chevy cars... well, *maybe* there's a defect in Ford cars. Or maybe more Ford drivers are insane. Who knows?
Unfortunately, we automatically go to "ah-ha, must be a defect" as a conclusion. Unless the company in question is Google.:)
Also if someone would just build a valve cluster that is electronic and will show the score, the note being played and ask the user to quickly find the correct fingerings it would be a boon for trumpet, French horn, valve trombone. Sousaphone, Tubas and more.
I used to do that, and still do when practicing. You sit there with your instrument and look at your music and go through it, in time, just as if you were playing, ecept you don't actually play it. You finger the valves harder than normal.
A three valve and four valve cluster could be made so that if the players real instrument is a three valve the fourth valve could simply be turned off. The idea is to get a metronome like response with the fingerings landing at the right moment.
That last bit may be somewhat novel, at any rate. Until the conductor changes pace:)
This would allow extending practice time in which no noise is made and also getting concentration on timing and correct fingerings. This could be a fairly inexpensive product that would aid millions of players.
That's already possible though. And if they already play, they already have an instrument to practice with... seems this owuld be an additional device requiring more purchasing...
This, at best, will only produce one side of the (in this case, brass) instrument: the fingering (or slide position).
Any brass player knows that what you do with your embouchure is a bit important... and what about tonguing? or, basically, all articulations? And breath - how does volume work?
Seems like at best it will produce relatively boring all-sound-the-same sampled notes. I don't see how it will get the required input from the player otherwise.
Look at keyboards now.. They're practically indistinguishable from some the instruments they emulate.
That is pretty false. I've heard some pretty expensive keyboards as well as digital/electronic organs (the pipe-organ-reproducing kind). They are quite good, and perhaps when recorded, hard to distinguish. When played in a live room, it's a lot different. Even with great speakers, an acoustic piano sounds different. Better? Worse? Well, that's an aesthetic, and I'm not arguing about that. If you like keyboards better, that's totally fine with me.:)
I think something like this could be good for parents that can't/don't want to spend the money on a real trumpet that their kid is going to give up on after a month. If the kid shows some proficiency with it and still wants a real trumpet after a while, then get a real one.
You can get a student trumpet for ~$150 (super cheaply made, from China) and a decent student trumpet for ~$300. I doubt the glove will be much cheaper than that, probably has a lower resell value, and is probably a lot more easily broken. And you can't play it in a band. And it requires speakers. And midi cables. And electricity...
Where? All I've ever experienced is demand for training from K-12 and also higher level.
This is why I didn't go to a public school, ironically. Well, why my parents' decided not to. They wanted me to be educated, not trained according to the government's standards (at this point you're thinking "ahhhhh, the typical conservative Christian fundamentalist homeschooler, I bet you buttoned your polo shirts all the way up, too... well, maybe you aren't, but someone is;)... which is ridiculous, because everyone agrees that we shouldn't be "trained by the government in school" but when someone says they didn't want to be trained according to the government's standards, they get weird looks like they are some sort of loony).
I like to think I was educated, anyways. I double majored in fields that interested me (one of which happened to be computer science, which was helpful as far as money goes; the other was music composition, which is not particularly helpful as far as money goes, except that some of my interviewers said they saw a correlation and thought the creative side is very important in my field). I didn't learn five different languages and didn't study abroad, but I took a lot of classes simply because I liked them or because they were interesting (various music courses, some computer science courses, certain math classes).
It is possible to be educated. I reckon it's possible in public universities as well. The problem is, nobody wants to be educated. People just want to "finish" school and go back to insert activity here-ing.
Are you talking about 2008 and Windows 7? Or do you need to go back to Windows 2000, XP, or even 2003? There are significant differences in the tools available based on the version (for example, powershell...)
But that wasn't the user's fault, that was Microsoft's fault, if you recall;)
Whatever. Ubuntu/Canonical can change Ubuntu to their liking. I use it because it's free, I can't complain much as long as the interface works. Switching to a Mac is a pretty significant UI change from Windows, but nobody seems to think that's such a big deal (or if it is, it's just the user being silly or something).
That said, I haven't actually upgraded yet. hehe...
the best you can do is show the last few years and say "well, we reckon it'll be sortof along these lines"
But see, my point is that arbitrarily taking the last decade and using that is somewhat silly... for all I know, there were major company changes (was Jobs at Apple in 2000? Will he be at Apple in 2020? Did anything significant change when Ballmer became CEO?)... or any number of other things. For example: Apple's major revenue increase has been relatively recently, and a large portion of that comes from the iPhone. Will the iPhone be a one-hit-wonder? Is it going to suddenly go out of style? If so, Apple's revenues just died. Will a "last 10 years trend" really show anything like that?
My point is this: blindly taking a couple general financial facts over 10 years makes a tidy statistic, but I don't know if it's a very useful one.
For that matter, a good analysis would even have to take into account things like... which company does well during recessions? during good economic times? during economic booms? which company has products that are more "luxury" products? because all that will significantly affect the next 10 years, depending on what the next 10 years has in store... and, along those lines, during the last 10 years, were we in more economically good times then 1990-2000? There are so many variables...
To me, if I am going to attempt to predict anything, I'd rather either take the last few years and only attempt to guess at the next few years... or I'd rather take a large chunk of company history and attempt to take it from, say, two rather stable positions; e.g., I don't want to pick a really bad time as my starting point and extremely profitable time as my end point...
Meh. I guess it comes down to this: I thought it was a remarkably general and over-simplified article that just compared a couple financial statistics that didn't really prove much without further clarification and then topped it off with a meaningless "if you bought this in 2000, you would have this much now!" comparison.
Thanks for the stock-price/history educated response..:) I was pulling dates out of my hat, obviously... to make a point that an artificial stock price timeline analysis thingy isn't necessarily a good analysis.
Doh. I just had a post and accidentally clicked a link in the preview. Sigh.
Here are some charts. Most of Apple's profit comes from the iPhone of late. Without it, it looks like its profits would have been much lower.
Here's a slightly dated Windows one. Office and Windows, you're right. On the whole, I'd say iOS products are more of a luxury item (and have more competition?) than Windows and Office.
Of course, if either one stagnates, then either company is in trouble:) Not sure how Windows 7 has improved or deteriorated MS's profits from the Windows line. It doesn't look like the iPad has made a *huge* impact on Apple, at least not to the same extent the iPhone did. There's rising competition for iOS products from Android products, now, I think... but I'm not sure any major significant OS competition is there yet (aside from OS X, which has not been growing very quickly...)
Well, to at least some extent, punctuation inside quotations is enough to end the sentence that includes the quote. For example:
He replied, "That's what I said!"
Nobody would write this:
He replied, "That's what I said!".
Similarly, then... if the quote includes a quote, you don't include extra punctuation; e.g., it should be something like this:
He replied, "And then I said, 'That's what I said!'"
You would not write:
He replied, "And then I said, 'That's what I said!'.".
In other words, if you are terminating your sentence, and your quote terminates in the same way, then the quoted section's termination applies to the "parent" sentence as well. If the punctuation differs - for example, you want to end with an exclamation point but the quoted portion does NOT end in an exclamation point - I'm not exactly sure how the rules apply. I know you CAN put the punctuation inside the quotes, but that could get confusing - was the quote supposed to be excited and thus marked with an exclamation point, or was the person quoting the one who was excited...
For example: $1k invested in 2000, AAPL vs. MSFT. What about 1985? 1990? 1995? Hindsight is 20/20, as the saying goes. Apple has had success with some of it's more recent Jobs products. But nobody KNEW that would happen before-hand. Apple has gone up and down; has Microsoft done the same? Was MSFT less of a gamble with a smaller potential benefit, whereas Apple was a gamble with large potential benefit? (I don't know, I'm only asking questions that could color the interpretation of these "infallible numbers"....)
Or, how about this one: revenue vs. profits. MSFT is still beating Apple in profit. So... which is more important? Total stock price? Profit? Total revenue?...
Or how about diversity of revenue? If suddenly iPhones and iPads went out of style, where would Apple be? If Windows phones went out of style, where would Windows be?
Interpretation of numbers is a big deal in comparing two companies... and there's a lot more to a company vs. company debate than revenue, profit, stock price/market cap, and phone sales... especially when products come and go as trends, and when one company has already shown that it falls apart without a certain CEO.
Slashdot Mirror
... to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced.
Translation: the federal government/current administration has to approve of the way you handle controversial views. What could possibly go wrong?
I would have thought that radio broadcasting would have somewhat similar rights to the freedom of the press. The "Fairness Doctrine" seems to challenge that idea.
Hehe, touche... on the other hand, it's possible to play quietly. But who wants "quiet" nowadays besides the old boring classical music types ;) (that would be me.)
Hum. Yes, digital recordings of a piano ... it's hard to distinguish a keyboard from a piano, but I'm not sure if that's just the way it's recorded or what. If comparing digital recordings to digital instruments then yeah, it's almost the same medium to begin with I guess :) Your explanation of the string vibration thing is one of the reasons I would think it would be quite difficult to realistically digitally model...
Yeah, you can get pretty cheap trumpets. Poor quality? Yes.... but you can still learn pretty much all the basics, you won't hurt yourself, and it'd be more versatile than a glove. The glove is missing some player input that the player does with his or her lips, tongue, and air... e.g., articulation (how hard to attack the note, how long to hold it, even how to end the note - end it by stopping air flow at the throat or end it by stopping air flow with the tongue? makes a different sound on the trumpet).
I guess I would put it this way.... to me, as a trumpet (and bass guitar, anyways :) ) player, among other instruments, I would see a single "glove" instrument functioning as a trumpet roughly the same you might see a "Guitar Hero" [toy] guitar functioning as a real guitar. You may be able to get it to sound the same in some ways, but it's missing a whole lot :D :)
My post was condemning said Colosseum-Complex, not condoning.
I actually didn't watch any videos or anything, nor seen any pics aside from the apparent hoax ones that pop up in ads and whatnot. I have no desire to see the blood or even watch outtakes, videos of him watching TV, etc. Again, I was attempting to explain what people were "missing" and then attempting to condemn it. I never thought me calling it a Colosseum-Complex would actually be understood to somehow be a positive condition... :)
My post was condemning said Colosseum-Complex, not condoning.
Apparently, I was confused as supporting or "having" what I termed the "Colosseum-Complex" (if some psychiatrist(s) used that term in the past, I was unaware). I do not support it; I don't "want" to see Osama's death pictures, I didn't click the "EXCLUSIVE OSAMA GETTING SHOT VIDEO!!!11" Facebook links, etc. I was stating that I think western culture is enthralled with violence as a show... and I think that's bad, not good. Cheering at someone else's death ... could be ok, I guess. I think Osama was a pretty bad man and some sense of relief seems ethical based on his death, and that relief may be expressed in cheering. However, it can easily become a "revenge" thing. Which I don't think is good.
No, it's two monsters.
This. It's hard to criticize a company for users who are ignorant or stupid (the former is understandable; the latter isn't). Statistics that are generic like this COULD point to something... but they might not, too. For example, if I came up with a statistic that said that Ford cars were crashed 10% more often than Chevy cars ... well, *maybe* there's a defect in Ford cars. Or maybe more Ford drivers are insane. Who knows?
Unfortunately, we automatically go to "ah-ha, must be a defect" as a conclusion. Unless the company in question is Google. :)
Also if someone would just build a valve cluster that is electronic and will show the score, the note being played and ask the user to quickly find the correct fingerings it would be a boon for trumpet, French horn, valve trombone. Sousaphone, Tubas and more.
I used to do that, and still do when practicing. You sit there with your instrument and look at your music and go through it, in time, just as if you were playing, ecept you don't actually play it. You finger the valves harder than normal.
A three valve and four valve cluster could be made so that if the players real instrument is a three valve the fourth valve could simply be turned off. The idea is to get a metronome like response with the fingerings landing at the right moment.
That last bit may be somewhat novel, at any rate. Until the conductor changes pace :)
This would allow extending practice time in which no noise is made and also getting concentration on timing and correct fingerings. This could be a fairly inexpensive product that would aid millions of players.
That's already possible though. And if they already play, they already have an instrument to practice with... seems this owuld be an additional device requiring more purchasing...
This, at best, will only produce one side of the (in this case, brass) instrument: the fingering (or slide position).
Any brass player knows that what you do with your embouchure is a bit important... and what about tonguing? or, basically, all articulations? And breath - how does volume work?
Seems like at best it will produce relatively boring all-sound-the-same sampled notes. I don't see how it will get the required input from the player otherwise.
Revision: last I saw, I think you could get the Chinese made super cheap trumpet for like $70 on ebay.
Look at keyboards now.. They're practically indistinguishable from some the instruments they emulate.
That is pretty false. I've heard some pretty expensive keyboards as well as digital/electronic organs (the pipe-organ-reproducing kind). They are quite good, and perhaps when recorded, hard to distinguish. When played in a live room, it's a lot different. Even with great speakers, an acoustic piano sounds different. Better? Worse? Well, that's an aesthetic, and I'm not arguing about that. If you like keyboards better, that's totally fine with me. :)
I think something like this could be good for parents that can't/don't want to spend the money on a real trumpet that their kid is going to give up on after a month. If the kid shows some proficiency with it and still wants a real trumpet after a while, then get a real one.
You can get a student trumpet for ~$150 (super cheaply made, from China) and a decent student trumpet for ~$300. I doubt the glove will be much cheaper than that, probably has a lower resell value, and is probably a lot more easily broken. And you can't play it in a band. And it requires speakers. And midi cables. And electricity...
If you can think of any positive result that can come from releasing them at this time, please share because I'm at a loss.
Satisfaction at seeing the hated person bloodied up, I guess? Let's call it a Colosseum-Complex.
Where? All I've ever experienced is demand for training from K-12 and also higher level.
This is why I didn't go to a public school, ironically. Well, why my parents' decided not to. They wanted me to be educated, not trained according to the government's standards (at this point you're thinking "ahhhhh, the typical conservative Christian fundamentalist homeschooler, I bet you buttoned your polo shirts all the way up, too ... well, maybe you aren't, but someone is ;) ... which is ridiculous, because everyone agrees that we shouldn't be "trained by the government in school" but when someone says they didn't want to be trained according to the government's standards, they get weird looks like they are some sort of loony).
I like to think I was educated, anyways. I double majored in fields that interested me (one of which happened to be computer science, which was helpful as far as money goes; the other was music composition, which is not particularly helpful as far as money goes, except that some of my interviewers said they saw a correlation and thought the creative side is very important in my field). I didn't learn five different languages and didn't study abroad, but I took a lot of classes simply because I liked them or because they were interesting (various music courses, some computer science courses, certain math classes).
It is possible to be educated. I reckon it's possible in public universities as well. The problem is, nobody wants to be educated. People just want to "finish" school and go back to insert activity here-ing.
Are you talking about 2008 and Windows 7? Or do you need to go back to Windows 2000, XP, or even 2003? There are significant differences in the tools available based on the version (for example, powershell...)
But that wasn't the user's fault, that was Microsoft's fault, if you recall ;)
Whatever. Ubuntu/Canonical can change Ubuntu to their liking. I use it because it's free, I can't complain much as long as the interface works. Switching to a Mac is a pretty significant UI change from Windows, but nobody seems to think that's such a big deal (or if it is, it's just the user being silly or something).
That said, I haven't actually upgraded yet. hehe...
How about knowing that your location was somewhere within a range of 800 miles? ;)
My point here was not to be an "apologist", simply to present some aspects of the data that were getting missed in all the hysterics.
Who said he was defending? Clarification of what is really going on != defense.
I can agree to that, pretty much. "read more of my articles" was pretty much my take of that too hehe.
the best you can do is show the last few years and say "well, we reckon it'll be sortof along these lines"
But see, my point is that arbitrarily taking the last decade and using that is somewhat silly... for all I know, there were major company changes (was Jobs at Apple in 2000? Will he be at Apple in 2020? Did anything significant change when Ballmer became CEO?)... or any number of other things. For example: Apple's major revenue increase has been relatively recently, and a large portion of that comes from the iPhone. Will the iPhone be a one-hit-wonder? Is it going to suddenly go out of style? If so, Apple's revenues just died. Will a "last 10 years trend" really show anything like that?
My point is this: blindly taking a couple general financial facts over 10 years makes a tidy statistic, but I don't know if it's a very useful one.
For that matter, a good analysis would even have to take into account things like ... which company does well during recessions? during good economic times? during economic booms? which company has products that are more "luxury" products? because all that will significantly affect the next 10 years, depending on what the next 10 years has in store... and, along those lines, during the last 10 years, were we in more economically good times then 1990-2000? There are so many variables...
To me, if I am going to attempt to predict anything, I'd rather either take the last few years and only attempt to guess at the next few years ... or I'd rather take a large chunk of company history and attempt to take it from, say, two rather stable positions; e.g., I don't want to pick a really bad time as my starting point and extremely profitable time as my end point...
Meh. I guess it comes down to this: I thought it was a remarkably general and over-simplified article that just compared a couple financial statistics that didn't really prove much without further clarification and then topped it off with a meaningless "if you bought this in 2000, you would have this much now!" comparison.
Thanks for the stock-price/history educated response.. :) I was pulling dates out of my hat, obviously... to make a point that an artificial stock price timeline analysis thingy isn't necessarily a good analysis.
Er.... well I don't know about number of sales, but iPhone revenue is higher than iPod revenue. iPad revenue is pretty small, relatively speaking.
Doh. I just had a post and accidentally clicked a link in the preview. Sigh.
Here are some charts. Most of Apple's profit comes from the iPhone of late. Without it, it looks like its profits would have been much lower.
Here's a slightly dated Windows one. Office and Windows, you're right. On the whole, I'd say iOS products are more of a luxury item (and have more competition?) than Windows and Office.
Of course, if either one stagnates, then either company is in trouble :) Not sure how Windows 7 has improved or deteriorated MS's profits from the Windows line. It doesn't look like the iPad has made a *huge* impact on Apple, at least not to the same extent the iPhone did. There's rising competition for iOS products from Android products, now, I think... but I'm not sure any major significant OS competition is there yet (aside from OS X, which has not been growing very quickly...)
Well, to at least some extent, punctuation inside quotations is enough to end the sentence that includes the quote. For example:
He replied, "That's what I said!"
Nobody would write this:
He replied, "That's what I said!".
Similarly, then... if the quote includes a quote, you don't include extra punctuation; e.g., it should be something like this:
He replied, "And then I said, 'That's what I said!'"
You would not write:
He replied, "And then I said, 'That's what I said!'.".
In other words, if you are terminating your sentence, and your quote terminates in the same way, then the quoted section's termination applies to the "parent" sentence as well. If the punctuation differs - for example, you want to end with an exclamation point but the quoted portion does NOT end in an exclamation point - I'm not exactly sure how the rules apply. I know you CAN put the punctuation inside the quotes, but that could get confusing - was the quote supposed to be excited and thus marked with an exclamation point, or was the person quoting the one who was excited...
the interpretation can.
For example: $1k invested in 2000, AAPL vs. MSFT. What about 1985? 1990? 1995? Hindsight is 20/20, as the saying goes. Apple has had success with some of it's more recent Jobs products. But nobody KNEW that would happen before-hand. Apple has gone up and down; has Microsoft done the same? Was MSFT less of a gamble with a smaller potential benefit, whereas Apple was a gamble with large potential benefit? (I don't know, I'm only asking questions that could color the interpretation of these "infallible numbers" ....)
Or, how about this one: revenue vs. profits. MSFT is still beating Apple in profit. So ... which is more important? Total stock price? Profit? Total revenue? ...
Or how about diversity of revenue? If suddenly iPhones and iPads went out of style, where would Apple be? If Windows phones went out of style, where would Windows be?
Interpretation of numbers is a big deal in comparing two companies... and there's a lot more to a company vs. company debate than revenue, profit, stock price/market cap, and phone sales... especially when products come and go as trends, and when one company has already shown that it falls apart without a certain CEO.