Taking a peek behind my desktop PC, I see mostly wires for the following:
2 VGA cables to my dual monitors 2 Power cords to those monitors 1 power cable for the PC 1 RF antenna for my FM tuner 1 Coax for my cable TV 1 cord for USB mouse 1 cord for USB keyboard 1 cord for power to my speakers 1 cord to connect speakers to PC
Let's do the math. 2/11 of those cords can be fixed with UWB. Unless wireless power is part of the spec, I'm quite sceptical of its desk clearing ability...
Because the marginal cost for each additional unit created (ie a song) is negligible. Logic would dictate that there ought to be an increase in the artists' royalties because the sum cost of distributing a song has significantly dropped.
Doubtful. These accounts are likely to contain a superficial amount of money. Why would the bank do this then? Well, if for example, the balance of these accounts hovered around a measly $1, that's a few million dollars that the bank can use to lend to others that it wouldn't otherwise have. More lending translates into profit. Done.
Sure that blocks malicious people from getting in. What happens if users unwittingly download a trojan while surfing on the net? Now Mr. Keylogger etc. has unfettered access out. Yes, now it's really that much more secure. I'm more afraid of malicious code being accidentally executed on a computer than someone zombifying the machine from outside...
Don't buy it--the Zune or your theory. That's a pretty damned expensive test bed. While there may be some potential money to be had if it were true, you don't go head to toes with Apple just to 'test the waters'. Business people make decisions based on ROI. The idea here is to carve a hole in the digital music player market and make a profit by it. No, this is your typical Microsoft dorkin' something up that they could have gotten right the first time.
No, the real hting lingering in mind is: Why? If I want to upgrade the GPU, now I have an additional cost because I have to upgrade the CPU as well and vice/versa. So, from economical perspective, is this the best way to go?
How ironic that in an age where we have the highest capability to preserve our history, it can become obsolete in a matter of decades. Take the 5 1/4" floppy disc. Assuming that the disk didn't loose it's magnetically bound data, I would be hard pressed in 2006 to find a drive that couuld read it. I don't even have a 3 1/2" drive anymore.
Another example. My father has a magnetic real from the 30's with a radio recording of my great grandfather. We have no idea how or where we can get a copy of it on a media that we can use, like cassette, CD, or MP3. Who knows what else is quickly evaporating from our ability to use anymore.
They can either accept that and change their business model accordingly, or they can die.
Hear, hear.
They have no other choice.
Well, actually, they can continue to do business as usual, sue and alienate everyone they want, or even pursue the more DRM'd model they're on track to enforce. But as long as there is some device that can play unrestricted formats, it won't work.
I have not COST them a thing. Your argument reminds me of an old chestnut of a logical problem that math, and logic professors have long loved to give freshman.
No flame war intended here, I'm afraid. Perhaps I should have put those dastardly <sarcasm/> tags; the freshmen drown without them.
I'm just pulling the peels off the eyes of people that the idea of DRM and other media locks is infinitely more sinister than petty file trading. You're absolutely right in that they lost no money that belonged to them, but they see it as potential revenue. But then you get into the sticky mess of: "Would the consumer have purchased our content for the device had the locks been there the whole time?" Now we're really slipping down the slope, aren't we?
No, the entertainment industry has landed itself in quite the quagmire. It will be interesting to see how things go as Vista usage increases--to the point where XP disappears like its predecessors. How much will the market withstand before it reacts--if ever? Will everyone flock to Linux? Some nerd's white dream it will happen. But who knows, as it has been said before: We live in interesting times.
the current business model for the Recording and Movie Industries is to sell you as many copies of the same content as possible. Sell you one copy on CD. One copy for your portable music player. One copy for your DVD. One copy for your PSP. One copy for your iPod. One copy for your BlueRay player. One copy etc this, one copy etc that.
This is the only way they can make money. If you only pay for one copy anymore, then you have effectively cut deeply into their expected revenue. People aren't going to the theater's because it is a one time experience. Why not just pick the DVD up and watch at your own convenience than sitting in a sweaty, smelly seat with over priced popcorn? Why pay for an iPod offering if you can just rip it from the DVD?
Sure you are stealing, you've cost them over $200 in lost revenue per piece of content. That's why they are lobbying so hard for DRM. That's why none of it is compatible with everything else. Otherwise, you're still only paying for that one copy.
Not by standing a little higher, but tuning your ego a little lower. Obi Wan did have the high ground, but had Anakin been a bit wiser, he would have done more to overcome his tactical disadvantage than using the Force to swell his pride.
'The fair use doctrine is in danger of losing its meaning and value.'
Damn straight it is! Listen, your failure to adapt to technology and a changing consumer are the reasons you're taking it in the shorts! Napster gave you a chance, but you took the high road, and look where it has you now. You're at least 10 years behind the curve and what are you going to do about it? Fat chance on changing the way consumers perceive 'sharing' music, what are going to do to *coax* them in? Because what you're doing now is throttling them in the throat.
How about creating a form that they can fill out with your email address stored and the email processed on the server. Add a CAPTCHA to prevent the form from being spammed, and bang! your done and your address is protected. That's what I do and no problems--yet.
The idea is not to remove them, but to place greater emphasis on C like languages. In my opinion, emphasizing.NET C++/C# increases the maintainability of the code because there is a lower learning curve associated with them. Going from C++ and Java to C# was a snap because most of the syntax was the same. Granted, there were a couple of things that kinda chaffed, like the capitalization of methods ( Foo.Bar(int baz); ) Aside from that and a few others, it wasn't a bad transition at all, when compared to VB.
Dump VB.NET in exchange for C#. You'll get more supporters on an open source system if you move to language that more closely resembles C, C++, Java. Sure they're compatible on a Windows box, but C# seems like a better choice between the two on Linux.
The idea of a suicide bomber was created in the Middle East. It is quite easy to find someone who is willing to strap a bomb to themselves, climb on board an Israeli bus full of civilians, and detonate it. Would this same person have any reservation driving a four door sedan with a nuke in the trunk and detonate it? I would daresay no. Why? Because instead of killing only ~20 people on a bus, now you can kill 500,000+ in a densely populated city. I mean what is next after a suicide conventional bomb? How can you do much 'better' than that without making the leap to a nuclear device? Let's face it, a conventional bomb packed with nails is passé, but a nuke, that's really up there as far as shock value, don't you think?
I don't think it's a matter of admitting them, nor is their position justification for their enemies to have them either. The whole idea of having nuclear technology is that you're sane enough not use them. You throw the $jihad variable in there and you unbalance the whole equation of nuclear technology.
Israel has them, without a doubt, but they know that they wouldn't use them simply because I don't think that they would nuke the land that Abraham promised them. However, the Islamic point of view may feel justified to do it, not because they think Abraham promised it to *them*, but because it would eradicate the infidel in a very decisive manner.
If you look at the political landscape surrounding Communism and Democracy (USSR & USA), we weren't playing our cold war based on religion, it was based on political ideal. We both knew we had the weapons and had a hair trigger on them, but we both knew and didn't want realize the consequences for using them, simply because we had sane people behind the button.
Slashdot Mirror
Taking a peek behind my desktop PC, I see mostly wires for the following:
2 VGA cables to my dual monitors
2 Power cords to those monitors
1 power cable for the PC
1 RF antenna for my FM tuner
1 Coax for my cable TV
1 cord for USB mouse
1 cord for USB keyboard
1 cord for power to my speakers
1 cord to connect speakers to PC
Let's do the math. 2/11 of those cords can be fixed with UWB. Unless wireless power is part of the spec, I'm quite sceptical of its desk clearing ability...
Ahh, but to get any media credence, you need to get a handful of 3rd world countries to buy into your idea. Then you can have your recognition.
Because the marginal cost for each additional unit created (ie a song) is negligible. Logic would dictate that there ought to be an increase in the artists' royalties because the sum cost of distributing a song has significantly dropped.
No, it means CmdrTaco is making a modification to the code...
Why can't your fellow paisanos run Mono, the Linux .NET CLR? No flame intended, but it seems that the .NET 'lock in' is dissolving.
Wasn't this on something like Charmed or one of those silly witch TV shows???
Doubtful. These accounts are likely to contain a superficial amount of money. Why would the bank do this then? Well, if for example, the balance of these accounts hovered around a measly $1, that's a few million dollars that the bank can use to lend to others that it wouldn't otherwise have. More lending translates into profit. Done.
Sure that blocks malicious people from getting in. What happens if users unwittingly download a trojan while surfing on the net? Now Mr. Keylogger etc. has unfettered access out. Yes, now it's really that much more secure. I'm more afraid of malicious code being accidentally executed on a computer than someone zombifying the machine from outside...
Don't buy it--the Zune or your theory. That's a pretty damned expensive test bed. While there may be some potential money to be had if it were true, you don't go head to toes with Apple just to 'test the waters'. Business people make decisions based on ROI. The idea here is to carve a hole in the digital music player market and make a profit by it. No, this is your typical Microsoft dorkin' something up that they could have gotten right the first time.
I read someone else's impressions of it and went to Best Buy and have to mostly agree with what he says.
I too felt that the Zune felt cheap and the button interface left much to be desired. Like the reviewer, I too own an iPod.
As it was said in Star Trek VI, The Undiscovered Country, "It is better to die standing, than to live on our knees".
Can it run Linux? OK JUST KIDDING!
No, the real hting lingering in mind is: Why? If I want to upgrade the GPU, now I have an additional cost because I have to upgrade the CPU as well and vice/versa. So, from economical perspective, is this the best way to go?
"Will an entire era of human history be lost?"
How ironic that in an age where we have the highest capability to preserve our history, it can become obsolete in a matter of decades. Take the 5 1/4" floppy disc. Assuming that the disk didn't loose it's magnetically bound data, I would be hard pressed in 2006 to find a drive that couuld read it. I don't even have a 3 1/2" drive anymore.
Another example. My father has a magnetic real from the 30's with a radio recording of my great grandfather. We have no idea how or where we can get a copy of it on a media that we can use, like cassette, CD, or MP3. Who knows what else is quickly evaporating from our ability to use anymore.
What a shame...
"Unfortunately, there's no easy way of identifying whether your distro supports the VBA interoperability apart from trying some VBA code."
Great, now I don't don't know if I'm vulnerable until it's too late. How do I disable it? Is now the time for a Linux anti-virus?
And I cordially invite you to read this.
They can either accept that and change their business model accordingly, or they can die.
Hear, hear.
They have no other choice.
Well, actually, they can continue to do business as usual, sue and alienate everyone they want, or even pursue the more DRM'd model they're on track to enforce. But as long as there is some device that can play unrestricted formats, it won't work.
I have not COST them a thing. Your argument reminds me of an old chestnut of a logical problem that math, and logic professors have long loved to give freshman.
No flame war intended here, I'm afraid. Perhaps I should have put those dastardly <sarcasm /> tags; the freshmen drown without them.
I'm just pulling the peels off the eyes of people that the idea of DRM and other media locks is infinitely more sinister than petty file trading. You're absolutely right in that they lost no money that belonged to them, but they see it as potential revenue. But then you get into the sticky mess of: "Would the consumer have purchased our content for the device had the locks been there the whole time?" Now we're really slipping down the slope, aren't we?
No, the entertainment industry has landed itself in quite the quagmire. It will be interesting to see how things go as Vista usage increases--to the point where XP disappears like its predecessors. How much will the market withstand before it reacts--if ever? Will everyone flock to Linux? Some nerd's white dream it will happen. But who knows, as it has been said before: We live in interesting times.
the current business model for the Recording and Movie Industries is to sell you as many copies of the same content as possible. Sell you one copy on CD. One copy for your portable music player. One copy for your DVD. One copy for your PSP. One copy for your iPod. One copy for your BlueRay player. One copy etc this, one copy etc that.
This is the only way they can make money. If you only pay for one copy anymore, then you have effectively cut deeply into their expected revenue. People aren't going to the theater's because it is a one time experience. Why not just pick the DVD up and watch at your own convenience than sitting in a sweaty, smelly seat with over priced popcorn? Why pay for an iPod offering if you can just rip it from the DVD?
Sure you are stealing, you've cost them over $200 in lost revenue per piece of content. That's why they are lobbying so hard for DRM. That's why none of it is compatible with everything else. Otherwise, you're still only paying for that one copy.
Not by standing a little higher, but tuning your ego a little lower. Obi Wan did have the high ground, but had Anakin been a bit wiser, he would have done more to overcome his tactical disadvantage than using the Force to swell his pride.
'The fair use doctrine is in danger of losing its meaning and value.'
Damn straight it is! Listen, your failure to adapt to technology and a changing consumer are the reasons you're taking it in the shorts! Napster gave you a chance, but you took the high road, and look where it has you now. You're at least 10 years behind the curve and what are you going to do about it? Fat chance on changing the way consumers perceive 'sharing' music, what are going to do to *coax* them in? Because what you're doing now is throttling them in the throat.
How about creating a form that they can fill out with your email address stored and the email processed on the server. Add a CAPTCHA to prevent the form from being spammed, and bang! your done and your address is protected. That's what I do and no problems--yet.
The idea is not to remove them, but to place greater emphasis on C like languages. In my opinion, emphasizing .NET C++/C# increases the maintainability of the code because there is a lower learning curve associated with them. Going from C++ and Java to C# was a snap because most of the syntax was the same. Granted, there were a couple of things that kinda chaffed, like the capitalization of methods ( Foo.Bar(int baz); ) Aside from that and a few others, it wasn't a bad transition at all, when compared to VB.
Dump VB.NET in exchange for C#. You'll get more supporters on an open source system if you move to language that more closely resembles C, C++, Java. Sure they're compatible on a Windows box, but C# seems like a better choice between the two on Linux.
US border agents noted a surge in US citizens returning from extended stays in Canada...
Consider this:
The idea of a suicide bomber was created in the Middle East. It is quite easy to find someone who is willing to strap a bomb to themselves, climb on board an Israeli bus full of civilians, and detonate it. Would this same person have any reservation driving a four door sedan with a nuke in the trunk and detonate it? I would daresay no. Why? Because instead of killing only ~20 people on a bus, now you can kill 500,000+ in a densely populated city. I mean what is next after a suicide conventional bomb? How can you do much 'better' than that without making the leap to a nuclear device? Let's face it, a conventional bomb packed with nails is passé, but a nuke, that's really up there as far as shock value, don't you think?
I don't think it's a matter of admitting them, nor is their position justification for their enemies to have them either. The whole idea of having nuclear technology is that you're sane enough not use them. You throw the $jihad variable in there and you unbalance the whole equation of nuclear technology.
Israel has them, without a doubt, but they know that they wouldn't use them simply because I don't think that they would nuke the land that Abraham promised them. However, the Islamic point of view may feel justified to do it, not because they think Abraham promised it to *them*, but because it would eradicate the infidel in a very decisive manner.
If you look at the political landscape surrounding Communism and Democracy (USSR & USA), we weren't playing our cold war based on religion, it was based on political ideal. We both knew we had the weapons and had a hair trigger on them, but we both knew and didn't want realize the consequences for using them, simply because we had sane people behind the button.
I can't say the same in this situation.