We have enough linear and crappy non linear editors.
We do? Linear video editing died with videotape and the advent of computer-based editing. Pretty much every computer-based editing system is non-linear, perhaps with the exception of those used for live TV, but even those systems are also capable of non-linear work, and are only used in a linear fashion because Live TV is, well, linear.
Can you point me to this multitude of linear editors which are still being released today?
To be fair, while I have tried every video editor that runs on Linux and found every single one lacking, it isn't entirely their fault. They can't import, or see the camera at all, and I assume that's a problem in the system, not the application.
Well, something is screwed up somewhere, because "seeing" and controlling a DV camera over a Firewire connection is a pretty trivial and well-understood affair.
When someone has pointed out that you've made a factual error, usually the best response isn't to get angry.
When did I get angry? I was not presented with the NYT article, or any of those other articles. I was presented with a very dubious article by an unknown source. Why shouldn't I call BS on that? Why didn't you just present those in the first place, rather than a link to TechDirt that links to a dodgy article on another site? Why would you even link to TechDirt, when you could have linked directly to that article, anyway? Very strange.
By the way, the articles you list don't exactly say that every e-book sale is a loss as you claim. They talk about some titles being sold for a loss, and others at break-even or profitable price points.
The reason we hold them to that standard in the first place is because they showed and claimed themselves to be at that standard.
Wow, you really are an apologist for Google, aren't you? you've been completely suckered in by their propaganda. What is this "standard" you speak of? Talking about themselves in a positive manner, making the company out to be "good guys" while at the same time mining your personal information for the purposes of marketing and advertising? Yeah, they certainly set that standard. Why anybody would applaud this is another matter. It's very weird to see people who are fanboys of an advertising company.
When I started using the internet, the idea that it should be used to commercial purposes was anathema. The "standard" was that it was for research and free cultural exchange to benefit society. It's amazing to me that today not only is rampant commercialism on the internet tolerated, it's actively praised, and a company that's business has been pimping out the web for profit is seen as some kind of hero of openness.
You know what's funny is that 90% of the time when I do search Google for something, I end up clicking the Wikipedia link anyway.
You're not wrong. I changed my homepage from Google to a random Wikipedia page, and it is great. Since hearing Eric Schmidt's douchebag remarks about privacy, I want to have as little to do with Google as possible. So, I'm actually using Wikipedia for searches when it is relevant. And for shopping, I now tend to go directly to retailers/distributors/manufacturers that I know and trust.
This has highlighted how much I don't actually need Google, and I was just using it as a crutch. It was there, and it was easy, so I just entered everything into Google, even when I didn't need to, or when I knew what the results of a search would be anyway.
Then again, Wikipedia probably uses Google for its own search, so I might be deluding myself anyway.
A pig and a chicken are walking down a road. The chicken looks at the pig and says, "Hey, why don't we open a restaurant?" The pig looks back at the chicken and says, "Good idea, what do you want to call it?"
But they are animals... how can they talk to each other? And if they could talk, wouldn't pigs and chickens speak a different language? I don't find this scenario particularly believable.
I found that quote particularly bizarre. Firstly, "staring quietly into space" - as opposed to staring noisily into space? I've never known staring to make any noise. Secondly, "I've seen this before" - well of course you have, you seem to spend a lot of time staring into space. Do you think perhaps it is space you are seeing?
Ummm, the techdirt article is based on an unsourced report - and if you look at the article that techdirt links to, it's a totally unsubstantiated piece of garbage, Are you really going to believe Amazon is losing money on every e-book transaction because of this nonsense article? No "facts" are provided, just unfounded conjecture.
For the most part, they loose money on each ebook sale.
Huh? Amazon often sells e-books for as much (or even more) than the price of a printed book. Seeing as there are no costs for storage and shipping, the profits should be larger than on printed books. From where do you get this idea that Amazon loses money on e-book sales?
You really think so? You figure the hackers were disgruntled Amazon shareholders working to increase their quarterly dividends?
I'm not sure where you get that idea from. I'm pretty sure most Amazon shareholders aren't hackers, and wouldn't support the idea of hacking the Kindle - until they see they increase in revenue that results.
My perception is that this will result in increased piracy, i.e., distribution through non-authorized channels from whom the authors of the books are not compensated.
Why would pirates need to hack the Kindle in order to pirate books? There are already plenty of unprotected sources available to them. To get the content via hacking Kindle files, they would need to buy the Kindle file in the first place, resulting in a sale that Amazon wouldn't have otherwise made.
And what about those "Fast and the furious" movies? They seem to be all hipped to the point of dripping in R&B, flash cars, flashier chicks, big bonehead "I'm da man" mentality oozing everywhere.
I guess... if you think that's cool and hip.
I think computers are way cooler in young culture at the moment than we older guys think.
As an "approaching older" guy, I would never deny this. Computers are pretty cool these days. I just regret that it wasn't this way in my youth, when War Games, Tron, or Ms. PacMan was about as sexy as computing got. The premise of the article is absurd. Nerds have never been cooler, and it would be detrimental if we got any more trendy.
More like; "Amazon-dot-com and shareholders rejoice, as more people can now read your files, therefore you make more money from increased e-book sales."
Nerd chic was barely getting started in the dot-com era, it was still fringe. Today it has reached mainstream status, and is the popular thing for 16-25 year olds.
"Geek" has always seemed like a pathetic sell-out, used by either people too insecure to embrace "nerd" or people that aren't actually technically proficient, but wanted to associate themselves with the status symbols of the dot-com era.
...the best way to disseminate knowledge is to print it on an 8" x 11", un-editable, fixed document stuck in a binder...
We're teaching kids to use tools that don't work all that well for the media-rich environment we have today. Teach them to write a Facebook app or use a content creation tool...
I don't think the best way to deal with the problem is to substitute one retarded idea with another even more retarded idea. How about we teach them how to do useful things?
"David Anderegg, a professor of psychology at Bennington College, says that merely mentioning terms like nerd or geek serves to perpetuate the stereotype. The words are damaging, much like racial epithets, he says, and should be avoided."
I highly doubt that you are, as "über geek" is a term that only other geeks or nerds would use, not the general public. And it's a kind of compliment - like "alpha male" which you might see applied to the hunting and car enthusiasts (but only the most influential and charismatic ones).
I'm not sure why you even have a problem with this, it's hardly a derogatory term. Those hunters and car enthusiasts might also be called "rednecks," "gun nuts," "Joe Sixpack" or other derogatory names.
Your comment about the media adding fuel to the fire is particularly strange, as I can't recall a TV show ever referring to somebody as an über geek.
How many movies exist about musicians, writers, and actors?
Well, there's that one about the piano genius, Shiny McShine.
How many songs are about music and dance? Too many.
Wait, what? There actually aren't very many songs about music. And it kind of makes sense that there are lots of songs about dancing, as songs are typically a medium to dance to.
Hmmm. When we're talking about a Netbook, which is supposed to be small, isn't a 10.2" screen actually less than a 7" screen? It's like saying; "Hey, buy our mobile phone, it's much bigger than an iPhone!"
Slashdot Mirror
You mean that you want anyone to be able to read your emails, without *any* restrictions? Is that your idea of DRM?
What an utterly bizarre non-sequitur. What does it have to do with the discussion at hand?
We have enough linear and crappy non linear editors.
We do? Linear video editing died with videotape and the advent of computer-based editing. Pretty much every computer-based editing system is non-linear, perhaps with the exception of those used for live TV, but even those systems are also capable of non-linear work, and are only used in a linear fashion because Live TV is, well, linear.
Can you point me to this multitude of linear editors which are still being released today?
To be fair, while I have tried every video editor that runs on Linux and found every single one lacking, it isn't entirely their fault. They can't import, or see the camera at all, and I assume that's a problem in the system, not the application.
Well, something is screwed up somewhere, because "seeing" and controlling a DV camera over a Firewire connection is a pretty trivial and well-understood affair.
When someone has pointed out that you've made a factual error, usually the best response isn't to get angry.
When did I get angry? I was not presented with the NYT article, or any of those other articles. I was presented with a very dubious article by an unknown source. Why shouldn't I call BS on that? Why didn't you just present those in the first place, rather than a link to TechDirt that links to a dodgy article on another site? Why would you even link to TechDirt, when you could have linked directly to that article, anyway? Very strange.
By the way, the articles you list don't exactly say that every e-book sale is a loss as you claim. They talk about some titles being sold for a loss, and others at break-even or profitable price points.
The reason we hold them to that standard in the first place is because they showed and claimed themselves to be at that standard.
Wow, you really are an apologist for Google, aren't you? you've been completely suckered in by their propaganda. What is this "standard" you speak of? Talking about themselves in a positive manner, making the company out to be "good guys" while at the same time mining your personal information for the purposes of marketing and advertising? Yeah, they certainly set that standard. Why anybody would applaud this is another matter. It's very weird to see people who are fanboys of an advertising company.
When I started using the internet, the idea that it should be used to commercial purposes was anathema. The "standard" was that it was for research and free cultural exchange to benefit society. It's amazing to me that today not only is rampant commercialism on the internet tolerated, it's actively praised, and a company that's business has been pimping out the web for profit is seen as some kind of hero of openness.
You know what's funny is that 90% of the time when I do search Google for something, I end up clicking the Wikipedia link anyway.
You're not wrong. I changed my homepage from Google to a random Wikipedia page, and it is great. Since hearing Eric Schmidt's douchebag remarks about privacy, I want to have as little to do with Google as possible. So, I'm actually using Wikipedia for searches when it is relevant. And for shopping, I now tend to go directly to retailers/distributors/manufacturers that I know and trust.
This has highlighted how much I don't actually need Google, and I was just using it as a crutch. It was there, and it was easy, so I just entered everything into Google, even when I didn't need to, or when I knew what the results of a search would be anyway.
Then again, Wikipedia probably uses Google for its own search, so I might be deluding myself anyway.
A pig and a chicken are walking down a road. The chicken looks at the pig and says, "Hey, why don't we open a restaurant?" The pig looks back at the chicken and says, "Good idea, what do you want to call it?"
But they are animals... how can they talk to each other? And if they could talk, wouldn't pigs and chickens speak a different language? I don't find this scenario particularly believable.
if google did that, it would lose all the power it can use to enforce the openness,
So, Google is kind of like our Big Brother, there to protect us and look out for us? Neat.
Isn't Hadoop an open version of part of their back end?
I thought that was goaste.cx.
I found that quote particularly bizarre. Firstly, "staring quietly into space" - as opposed to staring noisily into space? I've never known staring to make any noise. Secondly, "I've seen this before" - well of course you have, you seem to spend a lot of time staring into space. Do you think perhaps it is space you are seeing?
Ummm, the techdirt article is based on an unsourced report - and if you look at the article that techdirt links to, it's a totally unsubstantiated piece of garbage, Are you really going to believe Amazon is losing money on every e-book transaction because of this nonsense article? No "facts" are provided, just unfounded conjecture.
For the most part, they loose money on each ebook sale.
Huh? Amazon often sells e-books for as much (or even more) than the price of a printed book. Seeing as there are no costs for storage and shipping, the profits should be larger than on printed books. From where do you get this idea that Amazon loses money on e-book sales?
You really think so? You figure the hackers were disgruntled Amazon shareholders working to increase their quarterly dividends?
I'm not sure where you get that idea from. I'm pretty sure most Amazon shareholders aren't hackers, and wouldn't support the idea of hacking the Kindle - until they see they increase in revenue that results.
My perception is that this will result in increased piracy, i.e., distribution through non-authorized channels from whom the authors of the books are not compensated.
Why would pirates need to hack the Kindle in order to pirate books? There are already plenty of unprotected sources available to them. To get the content via hacking Kindle files, they would need to buy the Kindle file in the first place, resulting in a sale that Amazon wouldn't have otherwise made.
And what about those "Fast and the furious" movies? They seem to be all hipped to the point of dripping in R&B, flash cars, flashier chicks, big bonehead "I'm da man" mentality oozing everywhere.
I guess... if you think that's cool and hip.
I think computers are way cooler in young culture at the moment than we older guys think.
As an "approaching older" guy, I would never deny this. Computers are pretty cool these days. I just regret that it wasn't this way in my youth, when War Games, Tron, or Ms. PacMan was about as sexy as computing got. The premise of the article is absurd. Nerds have never been cooler, and it would be detrimental if we got any more trendy.
Users of alternative e-book readers rejoice.
More like; "Amazon-dot-com and shareholders rejoice, as more people can now read your files, therefore you make more money from increased e-book sales."
Nerd chic was barely getting started in the dot-com era, it was still fringe. Today it has reached mainstream status, and is the popular thing for 16-25 year olds.
And of course lets not forget the nightmare-inducing Windows 7 release party instructional video...
Actually, I rather would forget.
"Geek" has always seemed like a pathetic sell-out, used by either people too insecure to embrace "nerd" or people that aren't actually technically proficient, but wanted to associate themselves with the status symbols of the dot-com era.
...the best way to disseminate knowledge is to print it on an 8" x 11", un-editable, fixed document stuck in a binder...
We're teaching kids to use tools that don't work all that well for the media-rich environment we have today. Teach them to write a Facebook app or use a content creation tool...
I don't think the best way to deal with the problem is to substitute one retarded idea with another even more retarded idea. How about we teach them how to do useful things?
At least if you learn German, you can visit oktoberfest 40 years from now, in theory.
I prefer visiting Oktoberfest in person. Visiting it in theory seems rather pointless.
"David Anderegg, a professor of psychology at Bennington College, says that merely mentioning terms like nerd or geek serves to perpetuate the stereotype. The words are damaging, much like racial epithets, he says, and should be avoided."
Neeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd!!!
Why am I labeled an "uber geek" ...
I highly doubt that you are, as "über geek" is a term that only other geeks or nerds would use, not the general public. And it's a kind of compliment - like "alpha male" which you might see applied to the hunting and car enthusiasts (but only the most influential and charismatic ones).
I'm not sure why you even have a problem with this, it's hardly a derogatory term. Those hunters and car enthusiasts might also be called "rednecks," "gun nuts," "Joe Sixpack" or other derogatory names.
Your comment about the media adding fuel to the fire is particularly strange, as I can't recall a TV show ever referring to somebody as an über geek.
How many movies exist about musicians, writers, and actors?
Well, there's that one about the piano genius, Shiny McShine.
How many songs are about music and dance? Too many.
Wait, what? There actually aren't very many songs about music. And it kind of makes sense that there are lots of songs about dancing, as songs are typically a medium to dance to.
Hmmm. When we're talking about a Netbook, which is supposed to be small, isn't a 10.2" screen actually less than a 7" screen? It's like saying; "Hey, buy our mobile phone, it's much bigger than an iPhone!"
if a whole lot of coders and analysts hadn't spent a ton of time pouring over reams of old code and fixing problems.
What were they pouring over their code, special sauce?