Agreed. But the organic compound has to come from *somewhere*. Even if it came from another planet source, that planet had to somehow receive the materials from somewhere else.
Actually, teenagers on average have *the most* expendable income of any working age group. Looking back into my not-so-distant high school days, kids would pick up a soda walking into school, spend five bucks at McD's when they could have brown-bagged it, pay seven for a movie at night...
The point is, kids *can* afford music (and thanks to iTunes, they don't have to buy the entire CD). The problem is, they have no concept of tradeoffs- that they should spend their money on what gives them the most value; and p2p or CD copying robs them of that principle that they will actually need in life.
And tangentially, the argument that "if I don't hear an artist's work, there is zero chance I'll buy the artist's work" doesn't hold for for CD copying. Kids will copy CD's from their friends who actually bought the original CD. I would also venture to say that the average schoolkid downloading from p2p downloads what he's looking for: music from bands that he knows of. He doesn't just peruse around looking for some unknown artist that will benefit from the attention. So that argument doesn't hold for this typical audience.
The point was, sometimes violence only brings on increased violence. If your 10 year old punches a bully and stands up for himself, that bully can do two things: 1. Cry, run off, and not bother you again. 2. Cry, get mad, get even- (possibly escalating the violence by trying to show how tough *he* is).
These outcomes will depend on the bully's maturity level. The latter could be a middleschool kid who only knows enough to be dangerous (ie: bring daddy's gun to school to act tough).
Violence can be the answer, but not with children who don't know how far to take it.
I can see how the current "rewritable" market for CDs and DVDs is very limited. However, that's largely due to two factors: limited total capacity and cheap price per unit.
I'd imagine that the normal market does not have 300GB of data that they need backed up at one time. I would *hope* that businesses would be relying on a more cost-effective/safer approach (ie: RAID, rewritable tapes, etc...) Thus, 300GB is pretty overkill; does it really matter whether it's 30GB or 300GB? -Not to most people.
Unit price is the other key factor here, I'd imagine. I can get a CD-R for a nickel. DVDs are only slightly more. If one breaks, use it as a coaster, nothing lost. However, I'd imagine that a 300GB holodisc isn't going to be the most economic solution for most home users: at least the ones that need to back up their 10GB of music and movies. And even then, you don't want to be doing one-time backups of 10GB. Better to periodically do backups *and* on different media.
I thought Chuck Norris has the whole state covered (and a little bit of New Mexico too). And even when Chuck can't stop the violence with roundhouse kicks, absolutely everyone else carries a rifle in the back of their truck.
Sounds like the problem could be fixed if we could just clone a few Chuck Norrises.
Agreed, the only way that a new media player will take off is if it can utilize the iPod. If it can't, there's no way that another music program will take off, it will be just one of the many in the sea of crappy, inconsistent programs.
*If* it can sync with the iPod (and thats a big "if" considering Apple not letting anyone in on their DRM and no way to sell music without said DRM), then Google may have a chance.
Given Google's track record, I'd expect some innovative features to set their program apart. Think about linking Picasa into their music program. That could be the push that gets the ball rolling for half the population that have Photo & Video iPods but have yet to actually put any of that on it.
The point is that those 11,800 were all purchased from a legal source and it would therefore not be profitable to sell the pre-loaded iPod at a price below the music and hardware itself.
Whether or not you bought the music online is irrelevant. In fact, if you buy it from the local store, I'm betting it will cost you *more* per song than it does at Apple, eMusic, or other legal locations.
If all the music is there legally AND the seller agrees to take that music out of his library (which BTW, are conditions that I doubt would be met given the types of dealers this transaction would draw in), then and only then would this be legal.
Still, within the legal limits, how would this be profitable? Buy the music for $11,682 or thereabouts and the iPod for $400, and only sell it for $800?
Assuming the legal requirements are met, that doesn't sound like a very profitable business plan to me.
Another 2cent thought, rather than grouping all patents together under one standard, how difficult would it be to set different guidelines on different types of patents?
Given that most software can be safely considered a "non-novelty" or even out-of-date if not updated within a few short years, why not reduce the patents to a few years also? This would provide protection (to startups and big corps. alike) without giving them grounds for monopoly.
A 5 year patent would *more* than cover existing technologies and wouldn't hinder future innovation. Protect the inventors but make the abstract claims publicly available within a few years. Definitely better than the vague, meaningless, nigh-limitless system.
Rather than one standard setup for all users, which is only mediocre for the majority (Windows), lets have a "many-distro" approach. Choose your own flavor which cators to your needs, we could have coding keyboards, *nix keyboards, Windows keyboards- (Ctrl-Alt-Del is bundled into one large key in the center of the board).
Would be a much more efficient system for everybody.
This may be the only safe way to protect the robot, but doesn't it seem a bit counter-productive?...A thick lead box enveloping the entire robot... Hmmm, how does it actually plan on accomplishing anything?
After having this video playing in the background for awhile, one interview question caught my ear: "So is your security getting better?..."
Aside, its funny to hear them concede that they're actually having to adjust for other browsers visiting their home page. "Use standard-compliant code? Heresy!..."
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. But the organic compound has to come from *somewhere*. Even if it came from another planet source, that planet had to somehow receive the materials from somewhere else.
So where does it start?
Actually, teenagers on average have *the most* expendable income of any working age group. Looking back into my not-so-distant high school days, kids would pick up a soda walking into school, spend five bucks at McD's when they could have brown-bagged it, pay seven for a movie at night...
The point is, kids *can* afford music (and thanks to iTunes, they don't have to buy the entire CD). The problem is, they have no concept of tradeoffs- that they should spend their money on what gives them the most value; and p2p or CD copying robs them of that principle that they will actually need in life.
And tangentially, the argument that "if I don't hear an artist's work, there is zero chance I'll buy the artist's work" doesn't hold for for CD copying. Kids will copy CD's from their friends who actually bought the original CD. I would also venture to say that the average schoolkid downloading from p2p downloads what he's looking for: music from bands that he knows of. He doesn't just peruse around looking for some unknown artist that will benefit from the attention. So that argument doesn't hold for this typical audience.
The point was, sometimes violence only brings on increased violence. If your 10 year old punches a bully and stands up for himself, that bully can do two things:
1. Cry, run off, and not bother you again.
2. Cry, get mad, get even- (possibly escalating the violence by trying to show how tough *he* is).
These outcomes will depend on the bully's maturity level. The latter could be a middleschool kid who only knows enough to be dangerous (ie: bring daddy's gun to school to act tough).
Violence can be the answer, but not with children who don't know how far to take it.
so... if that is right... i could, theoritcally, break the intarweb for all of harvard? +5 Interesting? Only on slashdot.
I can see how the current "rewritable" market for CDs and DVDs is very limited. However, that's largely due to two factors: limited total capacity and cheap price per unit.
I'd imagine that the normal market does not have 300GB of data that they need backed up at one time. I would *hope* that businesses would be relying on a more cost-effective/safer approach (ie: RAID, rewritable tapes, etc...)
Thus, 300GB is pretty overkill; does it really matter whether it's 30GB or 300GB? -Not to most people.
Unit price is the other key factor here, I'd imagine. I can get a CD-R for a nickel. DVDs are only slightly more. If one breaks, use it as a coaster, nothing lost. However, I'd imagine that a 300GB holodisc isn't going to be the most economic solution for most home users: at least the ones that need to back up their 10GB of music and movies.
And even then, you don't want to be doing one-time backups of 10GB. Better to periodically do backups *and* on different media.
Bottom line: Inefficient overkill.
Since when does Texas need a police force?
I thought Chuck Norris has the whole state covered (and a little bit of New Mexico too).
And even when Chuck can't stop the violence with roundhouse kicks, absolutely everyone else carries a rifle in the back of their truck.
Sounds like the problem could be fixed if we could just clone a few Chuck Norrises.
Agreed, the only way that a new media player will take off is if it can utilize the iPod. If it can't, there's no way that another music program will take off, it will be just one of the many in the sea of crappy, inconsistent programs.
*If* it can sync with the iPod (and thats a big "if" considering Apple not letting anyone in on their DRM and no way to sell music without said DRM), then Google may have a chance.
Given Google's track record, I'd expect some innovative features to set their program apart. Think about linking Picasa into their music program. That could be the push that gets the ball rolling for half the population that have Photo & Video iPods but have yet to actually put any of that on it.
The point is that those 11,800 were all purchased from a legal source and it would therefore not be profitable to sell the pre-loaded iPod at a price below the music and hardware itself.
Whether or not you bought the music online is irrelevant. In fact, if you buy it from the local store, I'm betting it will cost you *more* per song than it does at Apple, eMusic, or other legal locations.
If all the music is there legally AND the seller agrees to take that music out of his library (which BTW, are conditions that I doubt would be met given the types of dealers this transaction would draw in), then and only then would this be legal.
Still, within the legal limits, how would this be profitable? Buy the music for $11,682 or thereabouts and the iPod for $400, and only sell it for $800?
Assuming the legal requirements are met, that doesn't sound like a very profitable business plan to me.
Another 2cent thought, rather than grouping all patents together under one standard, how difficult would it be to set different guidelines on different types of patents? Given that most software can be safely considered a "non-novelty" or even out-of-date if not updated within a few short years, why not reduce the patents to a few years also? This would provide protection (to startups and big corps. alike) without giving them grounds for monopoly. A 5 year patent would *more* than cover existing technologies and wouldn't hinder future innovation. Protect the inventors but make the abstract claims publicly available within a few years. Definitely better than the vague, meaningless, nigh-limitless system.
Rather than one standard setup for all users, which is only mediocre for the majority (Windows), lets have a "many-distro" approach. Choose your own flavor which cators to your needs, we could have coding keyboards, *nix keyboards, Windows keyboards- (Ctrl-Alt-Del is bundled into one large key in the center of the board). Would be a much more efficient system for everybody.
This may be the only safe way to protect the robot, but doesn't it seem a bit counter-productive? ...A thick lead box enveloping the entire robot... Hmmm, how does it actually plan on accomplishing anything?
After having this video playing in the background for awhile, one interview question caught my ear:
"So is your security getting better?..."
Aside, its funny to hear them concede that they're actually having to adjust for other browsers visiting their home page.
"Use standard-compliant code? Heresy!..."