People get up in the morning, commute for a couple hours, work for ten or twelve hours, telecommute for a couple more hours. Feed the family. Pay the bills. Try and save a bit for retirement (or children's education, etc). Fix the broken shit in the house. Spend quality time with the kids and wife. Get some rest before doing it all again the next day.
.... And then dance and drink and screw, because there's nothing left to do...
I can only agree with you, when I ask my co-workers why they work in IT, 95% say because of the good salaries it provided a couple of years ago. One of them had studies as interior decorator and was doing PERL!!. The people, after some years of working in IT, get depressed as they do something they really come to hate, and the only thing you hear in the company is people complaining and saying how soon they're going to to quit this job, but no one ever does because they cannot find a similar salary nowadays. So at the end you get an army of uninterested, unmotivated, public worker clones who do not give a shit about their jobs or its quality. This applies to any Job, if you do it for the money -ALONE- then you'll get tired of it pretty soon. My 2c: Do what you really would like to do, even if pays are lame.
Imagine if, for example, universal decided to open an ISP (or invest into an existing one for that matter) and let you download legally everything form their catalog. Imagine, you pay $30 or whatever for your usual connection, and on top of the usual functionalities, that gives you legal access to the whole universal catalog. They'll get their share of the profits and voilà, everybody happy. But I guess it's easier to call a lawyer than be imaginative....
How on earth does somebody think that a FREE model will be ever replaced by a NON FREE one??
Face it, even if it is illegal, downloading from a P2P network is free. sure, there is a risk of 1 in 6billions of being caught, but a lot of people are willing to take this risk.
Even if a system comes out that allows you to d/l legally your song for say 0,001$, a vast majority will continue to get their stuff for free.
What I mean to say here is that there is no turning back, songs have become free and will stay like this from now on, what they have to do is to find a new business model that will allow them to get money from something else related to music, but not from the songs themselves.
The big thing here is that we're getting the goods directly, with no third men involved, and it is preciseley these 3rd men that are in trouble.
Bands make huge amounts from concerts, and they might make nothing from record sales, but their free music will make more people know them and eventually go to their concerts.
I know it sounds stupid, but having to go through the code helps me to understand it much better than just reading comments. You see, the problem is that as much as a developer might comment his/her code, he/she will give as obvious some things that might be not so obvious, thus, you end up supposing you understand the code when you really do not. On the other hand, having to look at it deeply in order to understand it, gives you a better understanding. I like to use the GPS analogy with this: When you use the GPS you can move around a city quick, but once you disable the GPS, you have the impression that you've never been to the city. Never use the GPS, and in one week you'll know the city by heart.
Well, Where I'm currently working now, a large Telco in Belgium, they request users to logoff when they leave but NEVER turn off the machines.. They do all their maintenance stuff during the night, like upgardes and backups and so on...
I have Telnet (cable) at home which offers discovery channel, and it's over the normal cable not over IP, so I don't see why they will offer it via IP when they already have the cable structure implemented. Specially when you consider that cabe can be watched on N televisions at the same time while IPTV only on one. About the soccer rights, are you talking about the Jupiler League or the european competitions? For the first one I do not know, for the second one, at least in the french side, was won by the usual cable channel (RTL), so there's no advantage there for IPTV. And lastly, the Bandwith thing, it was the guy who made the demo who told me that IPTV is so demanding that probably it wouldn't be a good idea to use the internet and watch tv at the same time. And to end, it is not because they believe in the technology that the technology will succeed... does Betamax ring a bell?
I'm currently working at Belgacom, Belgium's biggest telco, they'll be soon launching their IPTV system and offered everybody a demo of the system.
Well, I must say I really do not see how they'll ever make it happen if they keep it like it was shown.
Quality wise it is just as good as any other digital signal you can think of, satellite or terrestrial DVB, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. But as the article (or the summary, this is slashdot) says, the big problem is in content. They provide exactly the same channels as you get on cable here, and belgium has a 99,99% coverage of cable (and the other 0,01% don't even get ADSL).
When I asked about the price their answer was "about the same as cable". The only 'real' advantage is the possibility of paying to watch recent movies, you pay 2,5 per movie and have the right to watch it during a 24hs period. This is exactly the same as if you rent the film on your video store, just that you do not have to move from home.
Also, you can only watch IPTV on -one- television at the time, as the signal takes approximately 3Mb/s of bandwith, which also means that unless you get a really high speed ADSL, you cannot use your ADSL for anything than watching TV while the TV is on.
I just do not get it.. I mean, the internet is a big place, you can be selling in the US and living in Kabul. I mean, if this is supposed to go for business (that are based in Ohio), what would stop these business to just opening a branch in, say, anywherer else but Ohio and then still sell as usual? Secondly, if this is intended for the regular Joe, what would stop him from asking his brother who lives in anywhere else but Ohio from selling the stuff for him, or hey, what would stop ME who lives in europe from being the person putting the stuff on sell on Ebay for people in Ohio against a fee lower than the proposed by the law? Anyhow, the result will be the same, less business in Ohio. Excellent.
I've had the same feeling as you several (more than I care to remember) times.... If it wasn't for people putting my ideas down I'd be rich now... well at least I can dream about that...But seriously now, I come from a country which is very very protectionist, and people have tried plenty of ways to make profit of this protectionism (1.Can't import this, 2.Find a way to do it, 3.?, 4. Profit!). Eventually it all comes down to one solution, corruption. I do not know how easy it will be to bribe a customs officer in the states.
And when they'll ask for the invoice proving that you bought that TV with that S/N in the states will you tell them to go look in your summer cottage??
Well, Saddam for one (as well as leaders in Iran right now) thought the same thing you thought, and look what got him into.
Now, being a little bit more realistic: in the US national defense is a ULTRA TOP priority, everyone agrees with that, what people do not seem to agree is what is considered to be national security by the US, some would say "Well, defend our borders so no terrorist comes and puts a bomb in our homeland", others will add "give people social services" to that other would say "forget all that, give us a rich country, that will make us safe". This whole patent history falls clearly on the last viewpoint.
You know, if they get serious on this patent thing, they will start imposing embargos or whatever other economic measure they will, until they get what they want.
But the US seems to forget history pretty quickly... centuries ago some other countries and/or cultures were as powerful (if not more) than the US right now, and their end was all due to the same factor, arrogance, they thought they were the "good doers" and simply imposed their views to the rest of the barbarians, and that until those very same barbarians turned against them leaving the oppressor with a "duh?" look in their face.
Maybe we will not see the fall of the US as a super power in the next few hundred years, but I'm sure time will prove me right.And I do believe that some european authorities have also realized this, and are starting to strengthen relations with other economies and becoming less us dependant, which can't be anything but a good thing.
I would have been extremist if I considered every american to be the average american, which fortunately for the rest of the world it is not the case! Some of the most interesting people I've met come from the USA.
I know I'm might be a little bit off topic here, but I can't help to think about the fall of communist Russia when I hear all these "corporate-protectionist" news. Extremes are BAD, wether they are to the right or to the left, up or down. The USA is going too far in protecting their "corporate" society, and this will eventually mean its very own collapse. Extreme capitalism will kill itself as Extreme communism killed itself. Unfortunately the average american is very much distracted by the war against terrorism to even notice this.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.... And, what if someone invited a device that could extract your memory (not erase it, just extract) and all your personal info... hmmm....
Unfortunately, you showed which is the main problem of this world even if you didn't intend to. Is people that think their culture is "better" who make it this bad.
The first question I would ask you is, who decides which culture is better?, or, who has the right to say so? you're right, each person should decide which culture is better, but for him/herself, not for somebody else.
Secondly, have you ever thought how would you feel if somebody else wanted to impose his/her culture to you based simply on the fact that he/she believes it is better than yours? Haven't you thought that maybe the eastern world think tehir way of living is the best?
Unfortunately, we're victims of our own nature, a big majority of people are blinded by ignorance, and use any excuse they can find to achieve their ends. Some use the "democrazitaion" of the "axis of evil", others the "anhihilation" of "infidels". The fact is that there will always exist a good excuse to try to impose one's views, as a matter of fact I'm doing exactly that, it's unavoidable. As much as some people would like to live in peace, there will always be somebody that will find a way to manipulate people in order to achieve their goals in a destructive manner.
IMHO there is one solution that might work, but this is just a dream, and this solution will not come without education. If we were educated to accept people's differences, if we were educated in order to accept the good things that other cultures have to offer, if we were educated in finding and rejecting what is so wrong with our own culture, then we'd be much better off. Of course problems would still be present, but in a much less dangerous manner, that's for sure. Unfortunately, those same people that manipulate others will never allow them to think for themselves.
What would be the main difference from projecting the image into a wall instead of that plastic thing in the middle of your living room?? You save space! This is another one of those "must haves" that you really do not need...
if you think about it, this whole thing started as a "web hosting" problem. If wikipedia, or any other community effort, didn't have this kind of problem we wouldn't be talking about paying for PD information. Now, with all this P2P thing going on and being presented as the paradigm of a free internet, wouldn't it be possible to create a P2P Web Server? I imagine a central application that would divert request to different peers accordingly, I'm not talking about creating a P2P network with new clients and so, just use your browser and then let the server handle the P2P part. This would keep free whatever the community would like to remain free, as people would be contributing with something they already paid for and are not using. Would such a thing be feasable from a technical point of view?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually you refer to a version of the song I was referring to... Pulp's "Common People"
People get up in the morning, commute for a couple hours, work for ten or twelve hours, telecommute for a couple more hours. Feed the family. Pay the bills. Try and save a bit for retirement (or children's education, etc). Fix the broken shit in the house. Spend quality time with the kids and wife. Get some rest before doing it all again the next day.
...
.... And then dance and drink and screw, because there's nothing left to do
I can only agree with you, when I ask my co-workers why they work in IT, 95% say because of the good salaries it provided a couple of years ago. One of them had studies as interior decorator and was doing PERL!!. The people, after some years of working in IT, get depressed as they do something they really come to hate, and the only thing you hear in the company is people complaining and saying how soon they're going to to quit this job, but no one ever does because they cannot find a similar salary nowadays. So at the end you get an army of uninterested, unmotivated, public worker clones who do not give a shit about their jobs or its quality. This applies to any Job, if you do it for the money -ALONE- then you'll get tired of it pretty soon. My 2c: Do what you really would like to do, even if pays are lame.
And now, if you live in florida, you can get shot just by looking menacing ...
Imagine if, for example, universal decided to open an ISP (or invest into an existing one for that matter) and let you download legally everything form their catalog. Imagine, you pay $30 or whatever for your usual connection, and on top of the usual functionalities, that gives you legal access to the whole universal catalog. They'll get their share of the profits and voilà, everybody happy. But I guess it's easier to call a lawyer than be imaginative....
How on earth does somebody imagine that people will pay to get around places when they can bicycle everywhere for free, free, free!
Wrong example there, if you had free buses would you pay for the same ride on the same bus?? I do not think so....
I was talking about the distributors, not the atists.
How on earth does somebody think that a FREE model will be ever replaced by a NON FREE one??
Face it, even if it is illegal, downloading from a P2P network is free. sure, there is a risk of 1 in 6billions of being caught, but a lot of people are willing to take this risk.
Even if a system comes out that allows you to d/l legally your song for say 0,001$, a vast majority will continue to get their stuff for free.
What I mean to say here is that there is no turning back, songs have become free and will stay like this from now on, what they have to do is to find a new business model that will allow them to get money from something else related to music, but not from the songs themselves.
The big thing here is that we're getting the goods directly, with no third men involved, and it is preciseley these 3rd men that are in trouble.
Bands make huge amounts from concerts, and they might make nothing from record sales, but their free music will make more people know them and eventually go to their concerts.
I know it sounds stupid, but having to go through the code helps me to understand it much better than just reading comments. You see, the problem is that as much as a developer might comment his/her code, he/she will give as obvious some things that might be not so obvious, thus, you end up supposing you understand the code when you really do not. On the other hand, having to look at it deeply in order to understand it, gives you a better understanding. I like to use the GPS analogy with this: When you use the GPS you can move around a city quick, but once you disable the GPS, you have the impression that you've never been to the city. Never use the GPS, and in one week you'll know the city by heart.
Well, Where I'm currently working now, a large Telco in Belgium, they request users to logoff when they leave but NEVER turn off the machines.. They do all their maintenance stuff during the night, like upgardes and backups and so on...
I have Telnet (cable) at home which offers discovery channel, and it's over the normal cable not over IP, so I don't see why they will offer it via IP when they already have the cable structure implemented. Specially when you consider that cabe can be watched on N televisions at the same time while IPTV only on one.
About the soccer rights, are you talking about the Jupiler League or the european competitions? For the first one I do not know, for the second one, at least in the french side, was won by the usual cable channel (RTL), so there's no advantage there for IPTV.
And lastly, the Bandwith thing, it was the guy who made the demo who told me that IPTV is so demanding that probably it wouldn't be a good idea to use the internet and watch tv at the same time.
And to end, it is not because they believe in the technology that the technology will succeed... does Betamax ring a bell?
I'm currently working at Belgacom, Belgium's biggest telco, they'll be soon launching their IPTV system and offered everybody a demo of the system.
Well, I must say I really do not see how they'll ever make it happen if they keep it like it was shown.
Quality wise it is just as good as any other digital signal you can think of, satellite or terrestrial DVB, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. But as the article (or the summary, this is slashdot) says, the big problem is in content.
They provide exactly the same channels as you get on cable here, and belgium has a 99,99% coverage of cable (and the other 0,01% don't even get ADSL).
When I asked about the price their answer was "about the same as cable". The only 'real' advantage is the possibility of paying to watch recent movies, you pay 2,5 per movie and have the right to watch it during a 24hs period. This is exactly the same as if you rent the film on your video store, just that you do not have to move from home.
Also, you can only watch IPTV on -one- television at the time, as the signal takes approximately 3Mb/s of bandwith, which also means that unless you get a really high speed ADSL, you cannot use your ADSL for anything than watching TV while the TV is on.
I just do not get it.. I mean, the internet is a big place, you can be selling in the US and living in Kabul. I mean, if this is supposed to go for business (that are based in Ohio), what would stop these business to just opening a branch in, say, anywherer else but Ohio and then still sell as usual?
Secondly, if this is intended for the regular Joe, what would stop him from asking his brother who lives in anywhere else but Ohio from selling the stuff for him, or hey, what would stop ME who lives in europe from being the person putting the stuff on sell on Ebay for people in Ohio against a fee lower than the proposed by the law?
Anyhow, the result will be the same, less business in Ohio.
Excellent.
I've had the same feeling as you several (more than I care to remember) times .... If it wasn't for people putting my ideas down I'd be rich now... well at least I can dream about that...But seriously now, I come from a country which is very very protectionist, and people have tried plenty of ways to make profit of this protectionism (1.Can't import this, 2.Find a way to do it, 3.?, 4. Profit!). Eventually it all comes down to one solution, corruption. I do not know how easy it will be to bribe a customs officer in the states.
And when they'll ask for the invoice proving that you bought that TV with that S/N in the states will you tell them to go look in your summer cottage??
Instead of stopping the shop from selling, they will stop people from importing those. It's easier I guess.
Sorry, just had a laugh.. Treaties?? Kyoto?? Den Haag International Court?? The UN?? Treaties are worthless, unfortunately.
Well, Saddam for one (as well as leaders in Iran right now) thought the same thing you thought, and look what got him into.
Now, being a little bit more realistic: in the US national defense is a ULTRA TOP priority, everyone agrees with that, what people do not seem to agree is what is considered to be national security by the US, some would say "Well, defend our borders so no terrorist comes and puts a bomb in our homeland", others will add "give people social services" to that other would say "forget all that, give us a rich country, that will make us safe". This whole patent history falls clearly on the last viewpoint.
You know, if they get serious on this patent thing, they will start imposing embargos or whatever other economic measure they will, until they get what they want.
But the US seems to forget history pretty quickly... centuries ago some other countries and/or cultures were as powerful (if not more) than the US right now, and their end was all due to the same factor, arrogance, they thought they were the "good doers" and simply imposed their views to the rest of the barbarians, and that until those very same barbarians turned against them leaving the oppressor with a "duh?" look in their face.
Maybe we will not see the fall of the US as a super power in the next few hundred years, but I'm sure time will prove me right.And I do believe that some european authorities have also realized this, and are starting to strengthen relations with other economies and becoming less us dependant, which can't be anything but a good thing.
I would have been extremist if I considered every american to be the average american, which fortunately for the rest of the world it is not the case! Some of the most interesting people I've met come from the USA.
I know I'm might be a little bit off topic here, but I can't help to think about the fall of communist Russia when I hear all these "corporate-protectionist" news. Extremes are BAD, wether they are to the right or to the left, up or down.
The USA is going too far in protecting their "corporate" society, and this will eventually mean its very own collapse.
Extreme capitalism will kill itself as Extreme communism killed itself.
Unfortunately the average american is very much distracted by the war against terrorism to even notice this.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.... And, what if someone invited a device that could extract your memory (not erase it, just extract) and all your personal info... hmmm....
Unfortunately, you showed which is the main problem of this world even if you didn't intend to.
Is people that think their culture is "better" who make it this bad.
The first question I would ask you is, who decides which culture is better?, or, who has the right to say so? you're right, each person should decide which culture is better, but for him/herself, not for somebody else.
Secondly, have you ever thought how would you feel if somebody else wanted to impose his/her culture to you based simply on the fact that he/she believes it is better than yours?
Haven't you thought that maybe the eastern world think tehir way of living is the best?
Unfortunately, we're victims of our own nature, a big majority of people are blinded by ignorance, and use any excuse they can find to achieve their ends. Some use the "democrazitaion" of the "axis of evil", others the "anhihilation" of "infidels".
The fact is that there will always exist a good excuse to try to impose one's views, as a matter of fact I'm doing exactly that, it's unavoidable.
As much as some people would like to live in peace, there will always be somebody that will find a way to manipulate people in order to achieve their goals in a destructive manner.
IMHO there is one solution that might work, but this is just a dream, and this solution will not come without education.
If we were educated to accept people's differences, if we were educated in order to accept the good things that other cultures have to offer, if we were educated in finding and rejecting what is so wrong with our own culture, then we'd be much better off.
Of course problems would still be present, but in a much less dangerous manner, that's for sure.
Unfortunately, those same people that manipulate others will never allow them to think for themselves.
What would be the main difference from projecting the image into a wall instead of that plastic thing in the middle of your living room??
You save space!
This is another one of those "must haves" that you really do not need...
if you think about it, this whole thing started as a "web hosting" problem. If wikipedia, or any other community effort, didn't have this kind of problem we wouldn't be talking about paying for PD information.
Now, with all this P2P thing going on and being presented as the paradigm of a free internet, wouldn't it be possible to create a P2P Web Server? I imagine a central application that would divert request to different peers accordingly, I'm not talking about creating a P2P network with new clients and so, just use your browser and then let the server handle the P2P part.
This would keep free whatever the community would like to remain free, as people would be contributing with something they already paid for and are not using.
Would such a thing be feasable from a technical point of view?
No one noticed I double quoted civilized ??