Where on earth does that outlandish claim come from? That is one of the most extraordinary things I've heard this year, and I can't help but wonder if it is not seriously misleading.
I can't get over the idea that they seriously considered restricting secondhand markets. Functioning secondhand markets reduce the new purchase price of consumer goods since you can get some of your cash back if you decide to sell; in other words, it makes you more likely to but the new good in the first place. Removing this option reduces the effective demand for the new good, which is contrary to what they were planning to achieve. In addition, the environmental effects of such a policy would have been potentially terrible.
Aggregation of information helps predict outcomes, I do not dispute that, but it isn't especially relevant to my original post, and your response to that. I am saying that the analysts at Merrill Lynch have thought long and hard about this piece of research that they have now held up to public scrutiny. Neither you nor I know if there prediction is going to be correct. Only time will tell. The fact that they are the only guys saying this doesn't mean they are wrong yet. You appear to be saying that because the the market as a whole doesn't agree, then there is no merit in their research
You appear not to know what happens in investment banks. Analysts make recommendations on stocks to internal and external parties as to whether to buy, sell or hold stocks. These reports inform the decisions of the traders and asset managers in the bank and in the wider market as to what to do with their stock. the guys writing these reports aren't journalists, they really have to know what they are saying because people will be willing to spend tremendous amounts of money on their advice.
Do you have a good book in mind? I am a professional economist, so I am interested in your new and exciting theory. What is the market except the aggregation of decisions of millions of analysts and other participants? If the analysts were consistently wrong, they wouldn't exist.
As I said in my post, they are better qualified than most other third parties to make comments about the future of the companies they track. I didn't say they are infallible. The fact that the profession as a whole made mistakes with Enron and other pathological companies doesn't mean that this specific report is wrong. read the report and make up your own mind.
...pointing out that this is clever marketing from Sony, or this is just some whacky stuff from Wall Street, remember that the analysts who wrote this report make their livings and substantial salaries from analysing their target companies. They know these companies inside out, because if they didn't they would be out of a job before they knew. When you consider their balls are really in a vice grip because if they get their predictions their wrong, their companies stand to lose a lot of money, then you give a bit more credence to reports of this nature.
Having read the pdf file, the analysis seems quite reasonable, and well considered, and utltimately quite persuasive. Whether it persuades you is a different matter, but before you dismiss the report out of hand, remember that the authors spend a lot of time trying to understand and predict what Sony is going to do, and therefore are better qualified than most third parties to reach conlcusions about slippages and prices.
Have you read the article? The library provides "privacy screens" if anyone objects to what you are looking at. "Stop making this an issue" - what does that mean? Stop exercising your civil liberties because it is inconvenient?
I agree with you 100%. If we assume the cost of transport and other administrative expenditures necessary to get these things to the people they are targeted for to be in total $50 (generous), then you have to look at the opportunity cost of dedicating $150 to this project. Directing this to the most vulnerable groups you mention would have a much greater effect on human welfare.
You mean that country in Europe where the head of state is also the head of the state's established church? And where you can't be head of state unless you're a member of the established church.
Really little content in the article, a representative sample of which is "The ambitious project will probably not be available anytime in the near future. Quaero is still in the earliest stages of development, so early that none of the major players have yet ventured a guess as to how much the project might cost. When Quaero does launch, it will have a great deal of catching up to do."
So basically, a bunch of European telecoms companies are discussing how to compete with Google. And this is news why? Nothing to see here.
It might seem crazy now, but it is hard to think of companies that really suffered (to the extent of exiting the industry) when they changed their brand names. Quality determines whether a product will be successful, and advertising and branding determine who successful it will be.
I am sure Intel have given a great deal of thought to this, and in a few years saying D 860 or whatever will be completely natural. As it is, they are going to get bucketloads of publicity from the name change and that will help their bottom line.
...the posts breathlessly announcing "Hackers manage to make Windows run on Apple", "Hackers manage to make Windows run on off the shelf Dell PC", "Hackers manage to make Windows run on X-Box", "Hackers manage make Windows run", complete with little pictures of the device in question displaying something characteristic of Windows....
That is the point exactly - I know that the Guardian is a UK paper, the issue I was raising was that the comparison wasn't a good one, because people in both the UK and the US have heard of Apple, but only people in the UK have heard of M&S, therefore, it is a poor comparison between a UK/European one and a global one on the lips of every teenager in the world, and a lot of people besides.
It is a strange comparison because, even though revenue may be in the same ballpark figure as these other companies, they are not growing as quickly as Apple has done since it launched the iPod, and while Apple may be medium sized now, it is steadily getting larger. It is also well known to anyone aged 16-30 - how many American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for.
I also don't understand why he appears to suggest that announcements made by the CEOs of other companies are scrutinised by brokers and other analysts. It was interesting to see all the work that goes into Jobs' presentations, but I think the author of the article was over-egging the importance of these presentations by attempting to diminish the size of Apple's importance and comparing the impact of the announcements to those made by other similarly sized companies. A bit dishonest I feel
Assuming this is true (keeping in mind the article is based on predictions and intuition) why would a tech savvy company partner with Walmart? I would have thought that if google decide to sell desktops they would follow the Dell model of selling their own customisable machines through their own website.
Imagine the sales they could generate if the first paid text link that appeared whenever you googled something like "new pc" or "pc prices" was for google's own offering? I accept that Walmart have an incredible distribution system, but since Google's business model is already so profitable, why hand margin over to old fashioned bricks and mortar retailers.
Reinforce the credentials of open source software?
Hmm. So if they are removed from the index does this destroy or undermine the credentials of open source software? I think none of these statements are correct.
Interesting that they have got someone who used to be involved in print media to review IP. The FT have been subscription only for quite a while now...
As for whether it is legimitate to enforce copyright 70 years after an author's death, it seems clear that any reasonable economic analysis would conclude that the marginal incentive provided to authors by this absurd protection doesn't influence their output of creative work, and is only likely to cause detriment to those who cannot afford to pay full price for a novel or other creative work. This would include citizens of LDCs, and poor people, two groups in particular need of reasonably priced access to important literary or academic works.
It could be argued that publishers are more likely to support struggling writers if they can collect money for 70 years after the death of the author, but where is the evidence that 10, 20, 30...years after the author's death wouldn't provide exactly the same incentives to publishers to hunt for the next JK Rowling?
This is a fairly frivolous, fun development, and good luck to the researchers who developed it.
If I were them, I would be hawking this bigtime to the console manufactures as with a little more finesse this could easily blossom into something like Sony's EyeToy.
How about combining this with a Revolution controller so you can wave a conductor's baton to change the tempo of your buddy's air guitar grooving? I, for one, would welcome my new baton overlord.
Interesting, hadn't thought of that. I wonder can ET make sense of all the transmissions that drift off into space? In any event, it is a clear signal (literally) that technological civilization exists on our little rock.
A slightly different concern I have heard expressed in relation to efforts to contact ET relate to the possibility that some unfriendly species will see our signal, take a look at our planet, and decide to enslave us. I know that respected professors at the University of Reading's Cybernetics department, whose names escape me, have expressed such concerns.
Since SETI and other similar programmes are based on the not unreasonable belief that other technologically advanced civilizations exist on distant planets, is it sensible to contact them and alert them to the presence of our resource rich planet? Extremely remote risk, but is there any reason to think that aliens are friendly? If earth discovered life on another planet, and this planet also happened to possess some material which greatly enriched the lives of humans on earth, how would we react?
IANASFB (I am not a science fiction buff) but I presume this type of scenario has been discussed.
Slashdot Mirror
Back pain is often caused by depression?
Where on earth does that outlandish claim come from? That is one of the most extraordinary things I've heard this year, and I can't help but wonder if it is not seriously misleading.
I can't get over the idea that they seriously considered restricting secondhand markets. Functioning secondhand markets reduce the new purchase price of consumer goods since you can get some of your cash back if you decide to sell; in other words, it makes you more likely to but the new good in the first place. Removing this option reduces the effective demand for the new good, which is contrary to what they were planning to achieve. In addition, the environmental effects of such a policy would have been potentially terrible.
Aggregation of information helps predict outcomes, I do not dispute that, but it isn't especially relevant to my original post, and your response to that. I am saying that the analysts at Merrill Lynch have thought long and hard about this piece of research that they have now held up to public scrutiny. Neither you nor I know if there prediction is going to be correct. Only time will tell. The fact that they are the only guys saying this doesn't mean they are wrong yet. You appear to be saying that because the the market as a whole doesn't agree, then there is no merit in their research
You appear not to know what happens in investment banks. Analysts make recommendations on stocks to internal and external parties as to whether to buy, sell or hold stocks. These reports inform the decisions of the traders and asset managers in the bank and in the wider market as to what to do with their stock. the guys writing these reports aren't journalists, they really have to know what they are saying because people will be willing to spend tremendous amounts of money on their advice.
Do you have a good book in mind? I am a professional economist, so I am interested in your new and exciting theory. What is the market except the aggregation of decisions of millions of analysts and other participants? If the analysts were consistently wrong, they wouldn't exist.
As I said in my post, they are better qualified than most other third parties to make comments about the future of the companies they track. I didn't say they are infallible. The fact that the profession as a whole made mistakes with Enron and other pathological companies doesn't mean that this specific report is wrong. read the report and make up your own mind.
...pointing out that this is clever marketing from Sony, or this is just some whacky stuff from Wall Street, remember that the analysts who wrote this report make their livings and substantial salaries from analysing their target companies. They know these companies inside out, because if they didn't they would be out of a job before they knew. When you consider their balls are really in a vice grip because if they get their predictions their wrong, their companies stand to lose a lot of money, then you give a bit more credence to reports of this nature.
Having read the pdf file, the analysis seems quite reasonable, and well considered, and utltimately quite persuasive. Whether it persuades you is a different matter, but before you dismiss the report out of hand, remember that the authors spend a lot of time trying to understand and predict what Sony is going to do, and therefore are better qualified than most third parties to reach conlcusions about slippages and prices.
Have you read the article? The library provides "privacy screens" if anyone objects to what you are looking at. "Stop making this an issue" - what does that mean? Stop exercising your civil liberties because it is inconvenient?
I agree with you 100%. If we assume the cost of transport and other administrative expenditures necessary to get these things to the people they are targeted for to be in total $50 (generous), then you have to look at the opportunity cost of dedicating $150 to this project. Directing this to the most vulnerable groups you mention would have a much greater effect on human welfare.
You mean that country in Europe where the head of state is also the head of the state's established church? And where you can't be head of state unless you're a member of the established church.
Really little content in the article, a representative sample of which is "The ambitious project will probably not be available anytime in the near future. Quaero is still in the earliest stages of development, so early that none of the major players have yet ventured a guess as to how much the project might cost. When Quaero does launch, it will have a great deal of catching up to do."
So basically, a bunch of European telecoms companies are discussing how to compete with Google. And this is news why? Nothing to see here.
It might seem crazy now, but it is hard to think of companies that really suffered (to the extent of exiting the industry) when they changed their brand names. Quality determines whether a product will be successful, and advertising and branding determine who successful it will be.
I am sure Intel have given a great deal of thought to this, and in a few years saying D 860 or whatever will be completely natural. As it is, they are going to get bucketloads of publicity from the name change and that will help their bottom line.
How has mathematics, statistics and other number driven aspects of life impacted you in the last decade?
It made me go made hairline recede like crazy as I studied calculus in school and at college.
...the posts breathlessly announcing "Hackers manage to make Windows run on Apple", "Hackers manage to make Windows run on off the shelf Dell PC", "Hackers manage to make Windows run on X-Box", "Hackers manage make Windows run", complete with little pictures of the device in question displaying something characteristic of Windows....
That is the point exactly - I know that the Guardian is a UK paper, the issue I was raising was that the comparison wasn't a good one, because people in both the UK and the US have heard of Apple, but only people in the UK have heard of M&S, therefore, it is a poor comparison between a UK/European one and a global one on the lips of every teenager in the world, and a lot of people besides.
It is a strange comparison because, even though revenue may be in the same ballpark figure as these other companies, they are not growing as quickly as Apple has done since it launched the iPod, and while Apple may be medium sized now, it is steadily getting larger. It is also well known to anyone aged 16-30 - how many American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for.
I also don't understand why he appears to suggest that announcements made by the CEOs of other companies are scrutinised by brokers and other analysts. It was interesting to see all the work that goes into Jobs' presentations, but I think the author of the article was over-egging the importance of these presentations by attempting to diminish the size of Apple's importance and comparing the impact of the announcements to those made by other similarly sized companies. A bit dishonest I feel
Assuming this is true (keeping in mind the article is based on predictions and intuition) why would a tech savvy company partner with Walmart? I would have thought that if google decide to sell desktops they would follow the Dell model of selling their own customisable machines through their own website.
Imagine the sales they could generate if the first paid text link that appeared whenever you googled something like "new pc" or "pc prices" was for google's own offering? I accept that Walmart have an incredible distribution system, but since Google's business model is already so profitable, why hand margin over to old fashioned bricks and mortar retailers.
My two cents.
Reinforce the credentials of open source software?
Hmm. So if they are removed from the index does this destroy or undermine the credentials of open source software? I think none of these statements are correct.
Interesting that they have got someone who used to be involved in print media to review IP. The FT have been subscription only for quite a while now...
As for whether it is legimitate to enforce copyright 70 years after an author's death, it seems clear that any reasonable economic analysis would conclude that the marginal incentive provided to authors by this absurd protection doesn't influence their output of creative work, and is only likely to cause detriment to those who cannot afford to pay full price for a novel or other creative work. This would include citizens of LDCs, and poor people, two groups in particular need of reasonably priced access to important literary or academic works.
It could be argued that publishers are more likely to support struggling writers if they can collect money for 70 years after the death of the author, but where is the evidence that 10, 20, 30...years after the author's death wouldn't provide exactly the same incentives to publishers to hunt for the next JK Rowling?
Here is a (pdf) link to some of the main economic issues involved here http://www.oiprc.ox.ac.uk/EJWP0502.pdf
Before anyone feels the need to point it out, I apologise the the stray apostrophe in turkeys...
Asking Slashdot "Should I post comments?" is a bit like asking turkey's "Should we cancel Christmas?".
Let the commencement of the comment posting beginulate!
This is a fairly frivolous, fun development, and good luck to the researchers who developed it.
If I were them, I would be hawking this bigtime to the console manufactures as with a little more finesse this could easily blossom into something like Sony's EyeToy.
How about combining this with a Revolution controller so you can wave a conductor's baton to change the tempo of your buddy's air guitar grooving? I, for one, would welcome my new baton overlord.
Interesting, hadn't thought of that. I wonder can ET make sense of all the transmissions that drift off into space? In any event, it is a clear signal (literally) that technological civilization exists on our little rock.
A slightly different concern I have heard expressed in relation to efforts to contact ET relate to the possibility that some unfriendly species will see our signal, take a look at our planet, and decide to enslave us. I know that respected professors at the University of Reading's Cybernetics department, whose names escape me, have expressed such concerns.
Since SETI and other similar programmes are based on the not unreasonable belief that other technologically advanced civilizations exist on distant planets, is it sensible to contact them and alert them to the presence of our resource rich planet? Extremely remote risk, but is there any reason to think that aliens are friendly? If earth discovered life on another planet, and this planet also happened to possess some material which greatly enriched the lives of humans on earth, how would we react?
IANASFB (I am not a science fiction buff) but I presume this type of scenario has been discussed.
Researchers find that a huge well designed freely accessible online database is used to store pr0n.
In other news, scientists announce that snow is cold, and that bears defecate in the wooded environments.