Are YOU being sarcastic? Or are you actually enough of a food nazi to want a government grocery monopoly because people buy food with food stamps that you personally would not buy. I guess we really should not allow a private sector, right? Things would be SO MUCH EASIER if we had central menu planning, too.
(Here's a hint: if you don't like Twinkies, don't eat them. Problem entirely solved).
Are these in public places? If so, there is no change in privacy (anyone can always look at you) unless the things start seeing through your clothes or something new like that.
"Censorship only happens when the government censors something. Which happens very very rarely."
Thanks for the clarification. I too am annoyed by the misuse of the word. Most often it is (incorrectly) applied to describe the instance of a publisher using their discretion (and free speech rights) to choose not to publish something.
Some guy shows up all paranoid about some problem, and wants to solve it using tinfoil. It's not like we've never seen this before.
I think he can use the same arguments to justify making automobiles out of tinfoil instead of all that nasty costs-too-much-energy-to-move heavy metal.
"Are you sure about that? Let me go home tonight, download the internet, and google it. [Ducks]"
That's a pretty good idea. The thought of having my own personal Google that has the entire net archived*cough*CACHED sounds great. With all the increasing regulation in the US and the United Nations now making noises about their intent to destroy it, you never know when you might wake up one day to find the Net gone.
"vouchers"
You bet! When the poor are given food stamps, they have a wide variety of stores where they can redeem them. They aren't forced to go to lousy "we don't have to try at all because we are a monopoly" special government food stores. Why not do the same with education?
"True, but he also mentioned MP3 files which, while I believe there are DRM schemes for it, none of them are widely used"
Really? There is something by which a file can be a valid.MP3 file, but have some sort of DRM to restrict play in my old Winamp 2.0 or my CD player that plays data CD's with MP3 files on them?
"Real conservatives [Tom Jefferson, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan] want organizations whether governmental, religious, business or social to be as small and powerless as possible so they'll have as little influence as possible on the individuals"
I'll leave out "Tom" due to the strong "apples and oranges" of comparing his situation to modern or recent times. Kennedy? He was unabashed about government having (in his general wording) an increasing role is improving the lives of Americans. He certainly did not want it to be "small and powerless". Reagan? Regardless of his words, the federal government grew steadily on his watch and with his encouragement. Ronald Reagan also openly welcomed both the allliance and the growth of the Christian Coalition/Falwell types, which directly contradicts "making religious organizations as small and powerless as possible". That makes those two not very close to your own definition of "conservative"."
If you look at his request for "non-transferrable downloads", the DRM-free flac and ogg files don't fit the bill. He's going to have to modify his request, because he cannot have all he's looking for.
"....setup a way to sell MP3's cheaply, and directly to fans.....and get a secure non-transferable download just like iTunes. DRM not required."
DRM is required to have a "non-transferrable download". Once you do that, it's not an MP3 anymore. MP3 files are not encumbered by DRM and are transferable. You are going to have to ask: do you want MP3, or do you want DRM? You can't do both.
""Democracy Now, like all other independent media in the U.S., has been marginalized since it's inception."
You might not know what independent means. CBS is independent (a separate company voice from the others). So is Fox News, CNN, Link TV, C Span, etc. CBS, by the way, has just a few hundred TV affiliates, which makes them even more "marginalized" than "Democracy Now" carried by 500 stations and growing.
That will do as a stand-in for Australia in a pinch. All we have to is add a few roos, hang everyone from their feet so they are upside-down, and hire Mel Gibson as a prison guard.
A fine for these guys is too easy. They should serve some sort of hard time, like in a prison or penal colony. Or imagine exiling them to a whole continent set aside to imprison them.... Oh wait.
"You have brought nothing to the table except your "world is flat" dismissals."
Nice way to change the subject from the fact that actual numbers of media voices show that there is no media consolidation.
"When you consider that Clear Channel used to own a paltry 41 before the Telecommuncations Act of 1996, and has now ballooned to over 1200 stations"
How misleading when you conveniently leave out that this is a small fraction of the total number of stations.
"but there are several others who have gobbled up television and radio stations and newspapers in markets all across the U.S."
Each of which controlls far less than what Clear Channel controls. How many do all of these control between them? 30% or 40% or something like that?
"That is media consolidation whether you want to admit it or not"
How can I "admit" something that there is no evidence for?
"The trend since 1996 has been cosolidation because the FCC relaxed the rules on how many media outlets a particular company could own. This is fact. "
The fact is that the FCC has relaxed the rules, but there has been no consolidation. Looking at the definition, "to bring together (separate parts) into a single or unified whole; unite; combine: They consolidated their three companies.", it is clear that nothing like this has happened.
From Ted Turner: "When I was getting into the television business, lawmakers and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took seriously the commission's mandate to promote diversity, localism, and competition in the media marketplace"
In other words, the FCC ignored the First Amendment and meddled in the media to try to dictate preferred content. Good riddance.
From Ted Turner: "They wanted to make sure that the big, established networks--CBS, ABC, NBC--wouldn't forever dominate what the American public could watch on TV."
Yet, when the FCC had much tighter control, we only had ABC,NBC,CBS. With the relaxation of control, we've had more and more new voices getting added. The"forever"domination" of those few voices is over.
From Ted Turner: "They believed in the value of competition."
And there is more such competition now than ever before. Do you want me to link to other new media voices aside from the ones I linked to above? It's like Ted had no idea what he was saying, which could be summarized as "Back when the FCC encouraged competition, we only had 3 news networks. Now we have less competition and more news networks."
"The debate here is whether or not media consolidation is happening or not"
I guess that is true. It is hardly a debate since there is no evidence of media consolidation.
"As I'm sure you're aware, the Dixie Chicks(sp?) made a comment about the president back in 2003 while on tour in London. Even though they are still around and touring, this comment cost them dearly"
Cost them? How so? Do you have any idea what cost means? They ended up more popular than ever, selling more music than ever. They are more than "still around".
"There was a corporate mandate "from on high" that dictated that none of the stations would play thier music after their comment."
Worked so WELL, didn't it? I'd never heard them on the radio before. After the Bush comment flap, I started to hear them on the radio.
" That is the kind of power media consolidation gives corporations. I'm sorry you can't understand this, but it's right there in front of your face"
What, the power to make musical artists like the Dixie Chicks more popular and more rich?
"Apparently you aren't aware of what happened to Pacifica during the 90's."
I followed this as it happened. Does not change the fact that Pacifica is a corporation.
I always look for words and phrases, never "concepts". That's why I hate bogus, irrelevant links in my results. If I ask for ABC, I expect ABC, not mostly ABC with a few ABD's and ABQ's in the list. This is one aspect in which search engine usefulness has actually declined. I have to use tricks to try to get relevant results, which used to come by default with no tricks.
Slashdot Mirror
Are YOU being sarcastic? Or are you actually enough of a food nazi to want a government grocery monopoly because people buy food with food stamps that you personally would not buy. I guess we really should not allow a private sector, right? Things would be SO MUCH EASIER if we had central menu planning, too.
(Here's a hint: if you don't like Twinkies, don't eat them. Problem entirely solved).
"but is it worth sacrificing our privacy for?"
Are these in public places? If so, there is no change in privacy (anyone can always look at you) unless the things start seeing through your clothes or something new like that.
"Okay, now with them spinning, rotate the drive around an axis other than the spin axis of the discs..."
And???? Due to the significantly decreased mass of the platters, isn't this much less of a problem now?
"Censorship only happens when the government censors something. Which happens very very rarely."
Thanks for the clarification. I too am annoyed by the misuse of the word. Most often it is (incorrectly) applied to describe the instance of a publisher using their discretion (and free speech rights) to choose not to publish something.
Some guy shows up all paranoid about some problem, and wants to solve it using tinfoil. It's not like we've never seen this before.
I think he can use the same arguments to justify making automobiles out of tinfoil instead of all that nasty costs-too-much-energy-to-move heavy metal.
"I should read the FA, but what's to stop his platters from flopping all over the place?"
Just keep 'em spinning all the time to keep them in a nice flat disc.
Now you need to fix the grammar! I missed it the first time too. Are you familiar with the songs made off of this poem/line?
"Are you sure about that? Let me go home tonight, download the internet, and google it. [Ducks]"
That's a pretty good idea. The thought of having my own personal Google that has the entire net archived*cough*CACHED sounds great. With all the increasing regulation in the US and the United Nations now making noises about their intent to destroy it, you never know when you might wake up one day to find the Net gone.
"vouchers"
You bet! When the poor are given food stamps, they have a wide variety of stores where they can redeem them. They aren't forced to go to lousy "we don't have to try at all because we are a monopoly" special government food stores. Why not do the same with education?
""Is all the we see or seem, but jsut a dream within a dream?" -Poe"
Love the SIG. Now I have both songs of this name going through my head. But you should fix the spelling.
"True, but he also mentioned MP3 files which, while I believe there are DRM schemes for it, none of them are widely used"
.MP3 file, but have some sort of DRM to restrict play in my old Winamp 2.0 or my CD player that plays data CD's with MP3 files on them?
Really? There is something by which a file can be a valid
Where's an example of this missuse of the word "censorship"?
"Real conservatives [Tom Jefferson, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan] want organizations whether governmental, religious, business or social to be as small and powerless as possible so they'll have as little influence as possible on the individuals"
I'll leave out "Tom" due to the strong "apples and oranges" of comparing his situation to modern or recent times. Kennedy? He was unabashed about government having (in his general wording) an increasing role is improving the lives of Americans. He certainly did not want it to be "small and powerless". Reagan? Regardless of his words, the federal government grew steadily on his watch and with his encouragement. Ronald Reagan also openly welcomed both the allliance and the growth of the Christian Coalition/Falwell types, which directly contradicts "making religious organizations as small and powerless as possible". That makes those two not very close to your own definition of "conservative"."
He also specifically asked for an MP3 service. You just can't do "secure non-transferable" with MP3. Technically impossible.
If you look at his request for "non-transferrable downloads", the DRM-free flac and ogg files don't fit the bill. He's going to have to modify his request, because he cannot have all he's looking for.
"....setup a way to sell MP3's cheaply, and directly to fans.....and get a secure non-transferable download just like iTunes. DRM not required."
DRM is required to have a "non-transferrable download". Once you do that, it's not an MP3 anymore. MP3 files are not encumbered by DRM and are transferable. You are going to have to ask: do you want MP3, or do you want DRM? You can't do both.
"What's wrong with Sounclick [soundclick.com]?"
I signed up for them once and got a lot of spam. They even make you sign up for the spam lists to download their FREE mp3's.
""Democracy Now, like all other independent media in the U.S., has been marginalized since it's inception."
You might not know what independent means. CBS is independent (a separate company voice from the others). So is Fox News, CNN, Link TV, C Span, etc. CBS, by the way, has just a few hundred TV affiliates, which makes them even more "marginalized" than "Democracy Now" carried by 500 stations and growing.
" For you, it's Guantanamo Bay."
That will do as a stand-in for Australia in a pinch. All we have to is add a few roos, hang everyone from their feet so they are upside-down, and hire Mel Gibson as a prison guard.
"Clinton cut the BEAURACRACY. Any military cuts are something completely different"
The number of non-government military employees increased under Clinton, as it has under just about all of the others.
Who has "opposed free trade at every turn"?
A fine for these guys is too easy. They should serve some sort of hard time, like in a prison or penal colony. Or imagine exiling them to a whole continent set aside to imprison them.... Oh wait.
"You have brought nothing to the table except your "world is flat" dismissals."
Nice way to change the subject from the fact that actual numbers of media voices show that there is no media consolidation.
"When you consider that Clear Channel used to own a paltry 41 before the Telecommuncations Act of 1996, and has now ballooned to over 1200 stations"
How misleading when you conveniently leave out that this is a small fraction of the total number of stations.
"but there are several others who have gobbled up television and radio stations and newspapers in markets all across the U.S."
Each of which controlls far less than what Clear Channel controls. How many do all of these control between them? 30% or 40% or something like that?
"That is media consolidation whether you want to admit it or not"
How can I "admit" something that there is no evidence for?
"The trend since 1996 has been cosolidation because the FCC relaxed the rules on how many media outlets a particular company could own. This is fact. "
The fact is that the FCC has relaxed the rules, but there has been no consolidation. Looking at the definition, "to bring together (separate parts) into a single or unified whole; unite; combine: They consolidated their three companies.", it is clear that nothing like this has happened.
From Ted Turner: "When I was getting into the television business, lawmakers and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took seriously the commission's mandate to promote diversity, localism, and competition in the media marketplace"
In other words, the FCC ignored the First Amendment and meddled in the media to try to dictate preferred content. Good riddance.
From Ted Turner: "They wanted to make sure that the big, established networks--CBS, ABC, NBC--wouldn't forever dominate what the American public could watch on TV."
Yet, when the FCC had much tighter control, we only had ABC,NBC,CBS. With the relaxation of control, we've had more and more new voices getting added. The "forever" domination" of those few voices is over.
From Ted Turner: "They believed in the value of competition."
And there is more such competition now than ever before. Do you want me to link to other new media voices aside from the ones I linked to above? It's like Ted had no idea what he was saying, which could be summarized as "Back when the FCC encouraged competition, we only had 3 news networks. Now we have less competition and more news networks."
"The debate here is whether or not media consolidation is happening or not"
I guess that is true. It is hardly a debate since there is no evidence of media consolidation.
"As I'm sure you're aware, the Dixie Chicks(sp?) made a comment about the president back in 2003 while on tour in London. Even though they are still around and touring, this comment cost them dearly"
Cost them? How so? Do you have any idea what cost means? They ended up more popular than ever, selling more music than ever. They are more than "still around".
"There was a corporate mandate "from on high" that dictated that none of the stations would play thier music after their comment."
Worked so WELL, didn't it? I'd never heard them on the radio before. After the Bush comment flap, I started to hear them on the radio.
" That is the kind of power media consolidation gives corporations. I'm sorry you can't understand this, but it's right there in front of your face"
What, the power to make musical artists like the Dixie Chicks more popular and more rich?
"Apparently you aren't aware of what happened to Pacifica during the 90's."
I followed this as it happened. Does not change the fact that Pacifica is a corporation.
"Limbaugh is a republican fanboy, not a conservative; same with Bush."
Are things really made so much easier when you make up political definitions all by yourself, on the fly?
"Right. Because we all know that wingnuts can't use the Internet."
:)
There's equal amount of wingnuts on both sides. You forgot to specify which wing in wingnut
I always look for words and phrases, never "concepts". That's why I hate bogus, irrelevant links in my results. If I ask for ABC, I expect ABC, not mostly ABC with a few ABD's and ABQ's in the list. This is one aspect in which search engine usefulness has actually declined. I have to use tricks to try to get relevant results, which used to come by default with no tricks.