1. The CEO of the company disagrees with the cable companies undisclosed bandwidth tap while advertising "unlimited" access 2. The CEO wants to run a bittorrent client and is sick of dealing with the cable company's illegally compromising his traffic 3. The CEO wants a provider which supports net neutrality
(I kid, I kid. I understand there may be other reasons)
sure it is -- it's called free will. You're free to pick wrong, but then you may go to hell, come back as a worm, or end up eaten by a body thetan or whatever.
They did promise to "continue to monitor and enforce any anticompetitive conduct to ensure a competitive broadband marketplace"
It kept Microsoft in check. Why, in 1999 Windows was $89 and Microsoft Windows was pretty much a monopoly, and the users had no real choice in the marketplace, and the bundled MSIE was being forced on users, knocking competitors out of the market - they were leveraging a monopoly to gain market share in another market. It was choose Windows, or you couldn't interoperate with anyone.
Now, thanks to the harsh antitrust rulings against Microsoft, Windows is now only $299, MSIE comes bundled with the OS, and you get the Microsoft sidebar with live/msn search integration whether you want it or not, and Windows is hardly the only choice for the average consumer.
Of course I expect the DoJ to monitor broadband providers to ensure they play fair.
yeah, on your 8" greyscale screen that didn't have backlighting and multimedia was pretty much nonexistent, that was true and you could get 8 hours on a charge (20 I don't believe). Most of us want a little more out of a laptop.
Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
It doesn't have to. Take Microsoft's shadow copies ("Previous Versions") for example. While a drive may have a certain amount of the disk available for shadowing, that amount is not a hard reserved amount. If the disk space is needed for live data, the oldest shadow copies are sacrificed (the space reclaimed). Sure, backups result in slightly higher processor and throughput overhead, but isn't it great knowing that databases backed up hot are being backed up in a consistent state? Isn't it wonderful that your mail server's mail store is being backed up hot in a consistent state?
Now, to respond to another point in a nearby post in this thread:
#20463209
ZFS is irrelevant to the desktop user, though. (How many desktop users care what filesystem they have?)
As a home user AND a work user I DO care what my filesystem is doing. I've been using Reiser at work but am switching to EXT3. The reason is not reliability, nor the "killer" filesystem aspect (even though Hans may be a bad guy, his filesystem is fantastic) but because my work machine has been sluggish when I go to move or delete files. I HAD to switch to EXT3 or XFS at home because Reiser has SERIOUS performance issues with Myth because of the slow deletes, and I was amazed at how responsive the system was compared to Reiser. So, I cut most of the work machines over one weekend (all machines except my own workstation). Yes, I am sacrificing Reiser's zero-slack (no wasted space) features and sacrificing some reliability, but the performance difference was big enough to make the sacrifice worthwhile. What good is an OS if you can create files very quickly but deleting them takes eons?
I like the fact that I have never lost data on Reiser. As an admin and busines owner that is important to me (I even had an Abit motherboard catch fire in one system. Upgraded the motherboard, booted the new system, the journal replayed and salvaged my open files!). However, the performance on a desktop was sometimes painful because of the slow deletes.
Users DO care, but don't know what they care about. They want their systems to not crash, not lose data, and to be responsive. Do they know specifically that the filesystem plays a part in it? Generally, no. They know "giggahurts" and MAYBE "megabites" or "giggabites" and generally know that bigger numbers in those areas is better but won't know that EXT3 may be faster than Reiser in normal desktop usage, or that ZF3 or XFS may be more reliable, or that using Myth on Reiser will slow your system down to a crawl. The user probably thinks "Centrino Duo" is a processor, and not a system incorporating a Core 2 Duo on a mobile chipset with a power-efficient WiFi card. They care that the systems work, and work well, and trust that those who know how to set the system up will worry about those petty details.
Yes. Look at Xfree86 as an example. For a long time they were pretty much the only player in town, and that effective monopoly resulted in lots of innov--- wait a second, I see a problem here. X.org anyone? Xfree86 was stagnated and falling way, way behind OS X and even Windows and it took forking the project to move things forward.
Monopolies are rarely a good thing - either closed/proprietary or free/open.
Correct - I looked into this because I was once assaulted at a CompUSA because I saw kids shoplifting, wearing jackets in the middle of summer and walking out unchecked, and the doorman asked to see my bag. I refused, saying "why are you harassing paying customers? If you do not trust your cashiers you need to be watching them, not harassing me." He then yanked the bag, drawing blood. Okay, he assaulted me, and I have physical proof - I now had the right to defend myself and physically disable him. I snap kicked him in the nuts, grabbed the pressure point in his wrist, and yelled for the manager. I explained what happened, and calmly said "Now, we can do one of two things: one, you can press charges for shoplifting without seeing my bag, and THEN you may check the contents and my receipt. If you are wrong, I WILL be pressing charges for unlawful arrest, assault, AND sue the store for defamation. Two, you can make this jerk apologise and then fire him on the spot."
Well, he knew I know my rights, he saw that the guy drew blood, and he has seen me in the store before buying high-ticket items (although after that episode the most I've spent at that store is $20, and scored advertised freebies on the day-after-thanksgiving loss leader specials) and he made the guy apologise and informed him that he was fired. Calling the police was deemed unnecessary. At that point I did give him the decency of showing him the bag and receipt, only to underscore my point. I then asked why I, a paying customer was harassed and assaulted, while teenagers are walking in, stuffing their bulky jackets, and then walking out unchecked.
Depending on your state, the store does NOT have the right to search your bags without cause, EVEN if clearly posted, unless you pay a fee and sign an agreement containing those terms - such as BJs, Costco, Sam's Club, etc. - when you walk into your store you do not give up your rights as an American citizen. Of course that was the 1990s, and all of that has changed now under Bush's administration; one is presumed guilty until proven innocent since 09/11.
Also, regarding drivers' license: depending on your state you may not EVER have to hand it to a police officer. That is the case here; I was once pulled over for passing in a passing zone - LEGALLY, in my Corvette. There was PLENTY of room to pass, but I did it uphill. An officer I saw two cars behind (I saw him behind before I passed - I thought nothing of it because it was a legal passing zone) pulled me over. He was a rookie - he asked for my license and registration. I SHOWED them to him. He asked me to hand them to and I told him I will not; it is my right to refuse to hand it to him, but I DO have to show it to him upon request if I am a driver and pulled over, so I am obliging to the law and showing it to him. He then asked if I knew why I pulled him over, so I said "I presume speeding, however, while passing I did not exceed the speed limit. As you know, that woman was hindering the flow of traffic, driving more than 10 under." Well, he proceeded to inform me he pulled me over because he does not think that passing zones should be legal, and that were I driving a Ford Escort, or even the Ford Crown Vic he was driving, I would not have made it passing uphill. I then entered smartass mode and replied "Well, this car isn't a clown vic, is it? I regret to inform you that despite your preferences, passing zones are legal, so write me up, and then you can follow me to the station a half mile down the road and we'll have a nice long chat with your supervisor." Well, of course he did not write me up, and saw that I had a spotless driving record for the previous 7 years (except for a "fix it" tag because I was pulled over in an MR2 I refused to get inspected - I now get my cars inspected because it has become a moving violation, not just a fix it tag and small fine). I've seen him around town since then and he's actually been downright friendly. I think he was just having a bad day or something, or he was gung-ho since he was a rookie, but I had
If the Supremes had ruled in their favor and made the VCR a contraband device they'd have lost billions! Yet they couldn't see that until well after the fact: I'd say we're not dealing with particularly intelligent people here.
It's not that they are not intelligent - quite the opposite. They are very intelligent, but they cannot see the tremendous profits beyond their greed. They are into immediate gratification. Do you think there is ever going to be another dinosaur of a band like Pink Floyd or U2 or the Beatles that will earn hundreds upon hundreds of millions for the record companies? Heck no. If an artist today shows only mediocre sales levels with a loose collection of singles, that artist will be dumped in favor of the next pop artist who scores a big selling single or two. They are not willing to back true talent as a long-term investment to wait for concept albums to hit the charts and stay on the charts for hundreds of weeks because it may take two or three albums flopping before the band picks up a following and through viral marketing attracts a wider audience and becoming a mainstream attraction, producing records for DECADES where customers WANT to buy the whole albums rather than just singles. It takes talent and skill on the artist's behalf, and it takes some measure of risk taking and investment on the label's behalf. Well, the Beatles are a little different in that they scored on their first release and didn't get into concept labels until they were well on their way toward breaking up, but the others floundered for quite a few albums before hitting it big - but when they did hit it big they were HUGE. If Pink Floyd were to tour today, the tour would easily net a half billion for the record companies, and if they were to release a new studio album, it'd be very likely to sell 20-30 million copies within weeks of release. If all of the Beatles were alive today, same thing.
Why do pop artists' singles sell today? Because those singles are slightly better than the rest of the new tripe out there. Maybe slightly better engineered the competition, or maybe slightly better peformance, or a catchy, memorable tune. BUT: people don't want the whole album because the rest of it is average to below average. They want that one hit, and that's all. Apple has forced the record companies to adjust their sales model and give customers what they want, and now they are beginning to realize that they may, just may have to return to the old model where they take risks on artists with real talents and visions, artists which have something real to say AND have strong composition and performance talent, and hope that after a few albums they will catch on in a real big way.
BUT if a major war does occur, I would expect the United States to convert to a controlled economy, ala WWII, and you'd see domestic production skyrocket in relatively short order.
During WWII it was possible only because the US was capable of being entirely self-sufficient. Modern stealth technology require exotic minerals which can only be mined in two places in the world; one in a "protected" area in one of the US's deserts (it's a wildlife preservation and cannot be mined) and in china. Unfortunately on the talk radio discussion I didn't catch what the compound in question is.
Modern weaponly also requires sophisticated microprocessors and circuits -- with our domestic chip fabs having been closed down and nearly all production shifted overseas, our domestic facilities are woefully out of date and cannot be modernized in a matter of days or weeks.
Likewise, tooling facilities and steel and titanium production in this country have been shut down, are old, run down, and not practical to convert to producing ships, aircraft, and missiles on short order. This has resulted in American workers having experience in the service industry, not manufacturing, and
Also, in this country, to sneeze you need to grease the palms of politicians to obtain permits, and have an environmental impact study conducted before building or even upgrading chemicals processing, manufacturing, and similar plants, or to even simply pave a large parking lot for a light industrial facility.
Lastly, chemicals are tightly controlled in this country; this has been stifling grassroots innovation. If today's regulations were in place back during WWI-WWII, we'd never have making missiles/rockets practical, never would have succeeded in perfecting turbine technology, and munitions? They would not have become as effective as they are now were it not for engineers independently researching and developing
When I was about 18 I wanted to get into amateur rocket building - I wanted to buy saltpeter, activated charcoal, and other chemicals for a really small homemade rocket, and no one I contacted was willing to help. If I were to try that now, I'd be reported to homeland security and be investigated for simply having interest in a new hobby.
What we have done in this country has crippled ourselves, AND we have modernized our enemies, AND are currently giving them money hand over fist for products we SHOULD be producing domestically.
What we had during WWII was factories which could be rapidly retooled to build ANYTHING, skilled machinists who could build anything by hand, domestic chemicals and metal production plants which could supply any steel or titanium or chemicals required, and there was little obstruction to getting what one needed for development and production. Grassroots innovation was encouraged and invited, and our technology advanced rapidly. The end result of this was a massive explosion in domestic production capability and skills which were capitalized on in the 1950s and 1960s, where we had tremendous trade surpluses with practically every trading partner, and if the US _had_ to be totally isolationist and self-sufficient, it was entirely possible.
No, the situation is totally different now. We're fucked. If the world were a game of chess, either Russia or China would have us in checkmate in one move.
Following upon that, it is said that 90% of business fail in the first year. Clearly engaging in business and is just an expense/cost center, so stop founding businesses.
How many new products fail? Look at Zune, and look at the iPod. Apple NAILED the dedicated portal media player with the iPod by giving it an excellent UI and GUI, (limited) cross-platform compatibility, and released a storefront/download/media management suite which not only adheres to quasi-open, de-facto standards such as MP3, but incorporated for its DRM a downright _reasonable_ copy protection scheme which really does block only casual "piracy," but does not really infringe upon wholly legitimate Fair Use in any way.
What did Microsoft do? They sunk hundreds of millions into the Zune (product development, production, marketing, etc) and ships it, leaving it up to users to discover that not only does it not work well with the established product leader, it does not work well with Windows Media Player, and also does not work with the widely-adopted "Plays For Sure" scheme that Microsoft previously shoved down customers' throats, forcing Zune customers to re-purchase content they already paid for and legally own, because breaking DRM and transcoding it to the Zune's format is beyond Joe Sixpack's ability. As a result the Zune flopped in the market. It's still languishing to this day. A friend working at an electronics retailer claims that the small chain sold only TWO Zunes as of June (I haven't asked him since - he was so amused by the fiasco he'd periodically bring it up in conversation), and are stuck with several hundred in stock.
My point? Products can and do flop. Some may flop because the idea came too soon, some because it was not implemented well, some because the price was too high, others because of lack of consumer awareness, and others because they are simply bad ideas. Zune failed because it was bad idea, a poor implementation, AND the price was/is too steep. Had Microsoft opened their standard just a tad, supported PlaysForSure, and supported cross-platform interoperability, then Apple may have had something to worry about.
Oh, there are other reasons products fail. Some due to reliability, some due to supply issues, and yet others due to outright poor timing and a stressed economy plus availability of better alternatives (cue cat for example).
"Give me a big enough lever and I can move the earth." Owning the OS is a pretty big lever. If you've been paying attention the last 10 years you've seen MS using their monopoly to destroy, stifle, and expand.
In addition to that, since the antitrust procedings started, the list price for Windows has quadrupled. THAT is clearly illegal as it is abusing their monopoly status to force price increases. Microsoft is a coercive monopoly and the DoJ and FTC are doing NOTHING about it.
Microsoft has a coercive monopoly because they are abusing their position to increase prices, and have been taking technical measures dating all the way back to Windows 3.x to break interoperability with third-party products. In addition, they push third parties in other industry segments out of business by bundling half-baked solutions with the OS (MSIE 1.x and 2.x, anyone?) in effort to take over their other markets where they see others' enjoying even a mediocum of success. Lastly, they held their prices artificially low (especially on MSDN, it has been alleged by some that Microsoft set up shell companies to get developers hooked on MSDN and shut them down when popularity hit critical mass at which point the new equivalent of an MSDN Universal subscription (the highest end non-volume-licensed subscription) which once was obtainable for $800 to $1200 is not unobtainable for less than $9,000, pushing out the ability of independent newcomers from entering the market. You may claim that $9,000 is not much for a company, but in reality for software it's insane, especially when you consider that many of today's megacorps were started in the '70s, '80s, and '90s by one or two people hacking some code on a new interesting program idea. $9,000 to a developer hacking a prototype on his or her own time at home -- it is a LOT of money.
$79 billion annually? Is that a WHOLE $79 billion? Well, thank God, then. I guess we have nothing to worry about then.
Wait a second, that's wrong! Our trade deficit is roughly $60 billion per month. In the face of that, $79 billion is a drop in the bucket. We're hemorrhaging money, jobs, and manufacturing capacity and if we don't end it and encourage domestic manufacturing, we'll be totally fucked soon, ESPECIALLY if WWIII breaks out (that's where we're heading with our current foreign policies) and need to manufacture artillery and vehicles on short order.
Most of them insist on running Windows. Why? Because if it's free, it can't possibly be any good. After all, everyone else runs Windows, right?
However, I have been able to get a bunch of them to try and switch to OpenOffice from MS Office, and get clients who were previously "pirating" Acrobat Distiller to try a LEGAL free alternative -- PDF Creator.
Sorry, I'm just frustrated that I spent thousands on two MSDN subscriptions and have been trying to activate them for a week, and have spent over 115 minutes on the phone, with the last two calls assuring me with 100% certainty that the problem is now resolved, only to discover they are STILL not activated and I have to call them yet AGAIN. GRRRRRRRRR!!! This is why I run Linux for everything except for client projects. Ugh.
Slashdot Mirror
re: What does coastal wildlife have to do with light pollution? WTF!
;)
Someone didn't read the article.
Here are some reading comprehension questions. Please answer using complete sentences.
1. What do newly hatched sea turtles instinctively do immediately following hatching?
2. How does artificial lighting affect migrating birds?
3. How does artificial lighting affect insect populations, and eventually, population of other wildlife?
It means that either:
1. The CEO of the company disagrees with the cable companies undisclosed bandwidth tap while advertising "unlimited" access
2. The CEO wants to run a bittorrent client and is sick of dealing with the cable company's illegally compromising his traffic
3. The CEO wants a provider which supports net neutrality
(I kid, I kid. I understand there may be other reasons)
Oh, I got the joke. It was one that deserved a response however.
sure it is -- it's called free will. You're free to pick wrong, but then you may go to hell, come back as a worm, or end up eaten by a body thetan or whatever.
Compare retail price to retail price as found on the shelf in best buy, etc. not retail to OEM.
They did promise to "continue to monitor and enforce any anticompetitive conduct to ensure a competitive broadband marketplace"
It kept Microsoft in check. Why, in 1999 Windows was $89 and Microsoft Windows was pretty much a monopoly, and the users had no real choice in the marketplace, and the bundled MSIE was being forced on users, knocking competitors out of the market - they were leveraging a monopoly to gain market share in another market. It was choose Windows, or you couldn't interoperate with anyone.
Now, thanks to the harsh antitrust rulings against Microsoft, Windows is now only $299, MSIE comes bundled with the OS, and you get the Microsoft sidebar with live/msn search integration whether you want it or not, and Windows is hardly the only choice for the average consumer.
Of course I expect the DoJ to monitor broadband providers to ensure they play fair.
What explains Point Break? I like that movie for one reason: it pokes fun at Nixon ("I am not a crook!")
yeah, on your 8" greyscale screen that didn't have backlighting and multimedia was pretty much nonexistent, that was true and you could get 8 hours on a charge (20 I don't believe). Most of us want a little more out of a laptop.
I started reading your post but got bored after the second sentence so I moved on. Oh, did I mention I have ADD?
;)
*apologises to the nice folks here who actually have ADD, even though they won't make it far enough in this post to read my apology*
Oh come off it. Slashdot dupes are an urban myth!
Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
It doesn't have to. Take Microsoft's shadow copies ("Previous Versions") for example. While a drive may have a certain amount of the disk available for shadowing, that amount is not a hard reserved amount. If the disk space is needed for live data, the oldest shadow copies are sacrificed (the space reclaimed). Sure, backups result in slightly higher processor and throughput overhead, but isn't it great knowing that databases backed up hot are being backed up in a consistent state? Isn't it wonderful that your mail server's mail store is being backed up hot in a consistent state?
Now, to respond to another point in a nearby post in this thread:
As a home user AND a work user I DO care what my filesystem is doing. I've been using Reiser at work but am switching to EXT3. The reason is not reliability, nor the "killer" filesystem aspect (even though Hans may be a bad guy, his filesystem is fantastic) but because my work machine has been sluggish when I go to move or delete files. I HAD to switch to EXT3 or XFS at home because Reiser has SERIOUS performance issues with Myth because of the slow deletes, and I was amazed at how responsive the system was compared to Reiser. So, I cut most of the work machines over one weekend (all machines except my own workstation). Yes, I am sacrificing Reiser's zero-slack (no wasted space) features and sacrificing some reliability, but the performance difference was big enough to make the sacrifice worthwhile. What good is an OS if you can create files very quickly but deleting them takes eons?
I like the fact that I have never lost data on Reiser. As an admin and busines owner that is important to me (I even had an Abit motherboard catch fire in one system. Upgraded the motherboard, booted the new system, the journal replayed and salvaged my open files!). However, the performance on a desktop was sometimes painful because of the slow deletes.
Users DO care, but don't know what they care about. They want their systems to not crash, not lose data, and to be responsive. Do they know specifically that the filesystem plays a part in it? Generally, no. They know "giggahurts" and MAYBE "megabites" or "giggabites" and generally know that bigger numbers in those areas is better but won't know that EXT3 may be faster than Reiser in normal desktop usage, or that ZF3 or XFS may be more reliable, or that using Myth on Reiser will slow your system down to a crawl. The user probably thinks "Centrino Duo" is a processor, and not a system incorporating a Core 2 Duo on a mobile chipset with a power-efficient WiFi card. They care that the systems work, and work well, and trust that those who know how to set the system up will worry about those petty details.
Yes. Look at Xfree86 as an example. For a long time they were pretty much the only player in town, and that effective monopoly resulted in lots of innov--- wait a second, I see a problem here. X.org anyone? Xfree86 was stagnated and falling way, way behind OS X and even Windows and it took forking the project to move things forward.
Monopolies are rarely a good thing - either closed/proprietary or free/open.
2+2=5
I love Big Brother.
Actually I am serious. Both of those incidents happened. Excuse me if I value my constitutional rights.
Correct - I looked into this because I was once assaulted at a CompUSA because I saw kids shoplifting, wearing jackets in the middle of summer and walking out unchecked, and the doorman asked to see my bag. I refused, saying "why are you harassing paying customers? If you do not trust your cashiers you need to be watching them, not harassing me." He then yanked the bag, drawing blood. Okay, he assaulted me, and I have physical proof - I now had the right to defend myself and physically disable him. I snap kicked him in the nuts, grabbed the pressure point in his wrist, and yelled for the manager. I explained what happened, and calmly said "Now, we can do one of two things: one, you can press charges for shoplifting without seeing my bag, and THEN you may check the contents and my receipt. If you are wrong, I WILL be pressing charges for unlawful arrest, assault, AND sue the store for defamation. Two, you can make this jerk apologise and then fire him on the spot."
Well, he knew I know my rights, he saw that the guy drew blood, and he has seen me in the store before buying high-ticket items (although after that episode the most I've spent at that store is $20, and scored advertised freebies on the day-after-thanksgiving loss leader specials) and he made the guy apologise and informed him that he was fired. Calling the police was deemed unnecessary. At that point I did give him the decency of showing him the bag and receipt, only to underscore my point. I then asked why I, a paying customer was harassed and assaulted, while teenagers are walking in, stuffing their bulky jackets, and then walking out unchecked.
Depending on your state, the store does NOT have the right to search your bags without cause, EVEN if clearly posted, unless you pay a fee and sign an agreement containing those terms - such as BJs, Costco, Sam's Club, etc. - when you walk into your store you do not give up your rights as an American citizen. Of course that was the 1990s, and all of that has changed now under Bush's administration; one is presumed guilty until proven innocent since 09/11.
Also, regarding drivers' license: depending on your state you may not EVER have to hand it to a police officer. That is the case here; I was once pulled over for passing in a passing zone - LEGALLY, in my Corvette. There was PLENTY of room to pass, but I did it uphill. An officer I saw two cars behind (I saw him behind before I passed - I thought nothing of it because it was a legal passing zone) pulled me over. He was a rookie - he asked for my license and registration. I SHOWED them to him. He asked me to hand them to and I told him I will not; it is my right to refuse to hand it to him, but I DO have to show it to him upon request if I am a driver and pulled over, so I am obliging to the law and showing it to him. He then asked if I knew why I pulled him over, so I said "I presume speeding, however, while passing I did not exceed the speed limit. As you know, that woman was hindering the flow of traffic, driving more than 10 under." Well, he proceeded to inform me he pulled me over because he does not think that passing zones should be legal, and that were I driving a Ford Escort, or even the Ford Crown Vic he was driving, I would not have made it passing uphill. I then entered smartass mode and replied "Well, this car isn't a clown vic, is it? I regret to inform you that despite your preferences, passing zones are legal, so write me up, and then you can follow me to the station a half mile down the road and we'll have a nice long chat with your supervisor." Well, of course he did not write me up, and saw that I had a spotless driving record for the previous 7 years (except for a "fix it" tag because I was pulled over in an MR2 I refused to get inspected - I now get my cars inspected because it has become a moving violation, not just a fix it tag and small fine). I've seen him around town since then and he's actually been downright friendly. I think he was just having a bad day or something, or he was gung-ho since he was a rookie, but I had
It's not that they are not intelligent - quite the opposite. They are very intelligent, but they cannot see the tremendous profits beyond their greed. They are into immediate gratification. Do you think there is ever going to be another dinosaur of a band like Pink Floyd or U2 or the Beatles that will earn hundreds upon hundreds of millions for the record companies? Heck no. If an artist today shows only mediocre sales levels with a loose collection of singles, that artist will be dumped in favor of the next pop artist who scores a big selling single or two. They are not willing to back true talent as a long-term investment to wait for concept albums to hit the charts and stay on the charts for hundreds of weeks because it may take two or three albums flopping before the band picks up a following and through viral marketing attracts a wider audience and becoming a mainstream attraction, producing records for DECADES where customers WANT to buy the whole albums rather than just singles. It takes talent and skill on the artist's behalf, and it takes some measure of risk taking and investment on the label's behalf. Well, the Beatles are a little different in that they scored on their first release and didn't get into concept labels until they were well on their way toward breaking up, but the others floundered for quite a few albums before hitting it big - but when they did hit it big they were HUGE. If Pink Floyd were to tour today, the tour would easily net a half billion for the record companies, and if they were to release a new studio album, it'd be very likely to sell 20-30 million copies within weeks of release. If all of the Beatles were alive today, same thing.
Why do pop artists' singles sell today? Because those singles are slightly better than the rest of the new tripe out there. Maybe slightly better engineered the competition, or maybe slightly better peformance, or a catchy, memorable tune. BUT: people don't want the whole album because the rest of it is average to below average. They want that one hit, and that's all. Apple has forced the record companies to adjust their sales model and give customers what they want, and now they are beginning to realize that they may, just may have to return to the old model where they take risks on artists with real talents and visions, artists which have something real to say AND have strong composition and performance talent, and hope that after a few albums they will catch on in a real big way.
. . . and when the problem is fixed, all users need to do to fix their systems is to enable Automatic Updates and then connect to the inter---
;)
Oh shit. That won't work!
During WWII it was possible only because the US was capable of being entirely self-sufficient. Modern stealth technology require exotic minerals which can only be mined in two places in the world; one in a "protected" area in one of the US's deserts (it's a wildlife preservation and cannot be mined) and in china. Unfortunately on the talk radio discussion I didn't catch what the compound in question is.
Modern weaponly also requires sophisticated microprocessors and circuits -- with our domestic chip fabs having been closed down and nearly all production shifted overseas, our domestic facilities are woefully out of date and cannot be modernized in a matter of days or weeks.
Likewise, tooling facilities and steel and titanium production in this country have been shut down, are old, run down, and not practical to convert to producing ships, aircraft, and missiles on short order. This has resulted in American workers having experience in the service industry, not manufacturing, and
Also, in this country, to sneeze you need to grease the palms of politicians to obtain permits, and have an environmental impact study conducted before building or even upgrading chemicals processing, manufacturing, and similar plants, or to even simply pave a large parking lot for a light industrial facility.
Lastly, chemicals are tightly controlled in this country; this has been stifling grassroots innovation. If today's regulations were in place back during WWI-WWII, we'd never have making missiles/rockets practical, never would have succeeded in perfecting turbine technology, and munitions? They would not have become as effective as they are now were it not for engineers independently researching and developing
When I was about 18 I wanted to get into amateur rocket building - I wanted to buy saltpeter, activated charcoal, and other chemicals for a really small homemade rocket, and no one I contacted was willing to help. If I were to try that now, I'd be reported to homeland security and be investigated for simply having interest in a new hobby.
What we have done in this country has crippled ourselves, AND we have modernized our enemies, AND are currently giving them money hand over fist for products we SHOULD be producing domestically.
What we had during WWII was factories which could be rapidly retooled to build ANYTHING, skilled machinists who could build anything by hand, domestic chemicals and metal production plants which could supply any steel or titanium or chemicals required, and there was little obstruction to getting what one needed for development and production. Grassroots innovation was encouraged and invited, and our technology advanced rapidly. The end result of this was a massive explosion in domestic production capability and skills which were capitalized on in the 1950s and 1960s, where we had tremendous trade surpluses with practically every trading partner, and if the US _had_ to be totally isolationist and self-sufficient, it was entirely possible.
No, the situation is totally different now. We're fucked. If the world were a game of chess, either Russia or China would have us in checkmate in one move.
Following upon that, it is said that 90% of business fail in the first year. Clearly engaging in business and is just an expense/cost center, so stop founding businesses.
How many new products fail? Look at Zune, and look at the iPod. Apple NAILED the dedicated portal media player with the iPod by giving it an excellent UI and GUI, (limited) cross-platform compatibility, and released a storefront/download/media management suite which not only adheres to quasi-open, de-facto standards such as MP3, but incorporated for its DRM a downright _reasonable_ copy protection scheme which really does block only casual "piracy," but does not really infringe upon wholly legitimate Fair Use in any way.
What did Microsoft do? They sunk hundreds of millions into the Zune (product development, production, marketing, etc) and ships it, leaving it up to users to discover that not only does it not work well with the established product leader, it does not work well with Windows Media Player, and also does not work with the widely-adopted "Plays For Sure" scheme that Microsoft previously shoved down customers' throats, forcing Zune customers to re-purchase content they already paid for and legally own, because breaking DRM and transcoding it to the Zune's format is beyond Joe Sixpack's ability. As a result the Zune flopped in the market. It's still languishing to this day. A friend working at an electronics retailer claims that the small chain sold only TWO Zunes as of June (I haven't asked him since - he was so amused by the fiasco he'd periodically bring it up in conversation), and are stuck with several hundred in stock.
My point? Products can and do flop. Some may flop because the idea came too soon, some because it was not implemented well, some because the price was too high, others because of lack of consumer awareness, and others because they are simply bad ideas. Zune failed because it was bad idea, a poor implementation, AND the price was/is too steep. Had Microsoft opened their standard just a tad, supported PlaysForSure, and supported cross-platform interoperability, then Apple may have had something to worry about.
Oh, there are other reasons products fail. Some due to reliability, some due to supply issues, and yet others due to outright poor timing and a stressed economy plus availability of better alternatives (cue cat for example).
In addition to that, since the antitrust procedings started, the list price for Windows has quadrupled. THAT is clearly illegal as it is abusing their monopoly status to force price increases. Microsoft is a coercive monopoly and the DoJ and FTC are doing NOTHING about it.
Microsoft has a coercive monopoly because they are abusing their position to increase prices, and have been taking technical measures dating all the way back to Windows 3.x to break interoperability with third-party products. In addition, they push third parties in other industry segments out of business by bundling half-baked solutions with the OS (MSIE 1.x and 2.x, anyone?) in effort to take over their other markets where they see others' enjoying even a mediocum of success. Lastly, they held their prices artificially low (especially on MSDN, it has been alleged by some that Microsoft set up shell companies to get developers hooked on MSDN and shut them down when popularity hit critical mass at which point the new equivalent of an MSDN Universal subscription (the highest end non-volume-licensed subscription) which once was obtainable for $800 to $1200 is not unobtainable for less than $9,000, pushing out the ability of independent newcomers from entering the market. You may claim that $9,000 is not much for a company, but in reality for software it's insane, especially when you consider that many of today's megacorps were started in the '70s, '80s, and '90s by one or two people hacking some code on a new interesting program idea. $9,000 to a developer hacking a prototype on his or her own time at home -- it is a LOT of money.
$79 billion annually? Is that a WHOLE $79 billion? Well, thank God, then. I guess we have nothing to worry about then.
a sp
_ States_trade_deficit
Wait a second, that's wrong! Our trade deficit is roughly $60 billion per month. In the face of that, $79 billion is a drop in the bucket. We're hemorrhaging money, jobs, and manufacturing capacity and if we don't end it and encourage domestic manufacturing, we'll be totally fucked soon, ESPECIALLY if WWIII breaks out (that's where we're heading with our current foreign policies) and need to manufacture artillery and vehicles on short order.
Check this out for monthly trade deficit tallies: http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/ticker_home.
For a US trade deficit graph underscoring the seriousness of the matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_surplus#United
Actually, since it is a government job, and there are equal opportunity laws, if someone is the most qualified and wants the job, it IS a right.
Most of them insist on running Windows. Why? Because if it's free, it can't possibly be any good. After all, everyone else runs Windows, right?
However, I have been able to get a bunch of them to try and switch to OpenOffice from MS Office, and get clients who were previously "pirating" Acrobat Distiller to try a LEGAL free alternative -- PDF Creator.
Am I the only one finding it ironic that Microsoft is demanding that Fair Use be recognized, while shutting down Autopackager and infringing on the right of first sale, even in cases where the software isn't even opened?
Sorry, I'm just frustrated that I spent thousands on two MSDN subscriptions and have been trying to activate them for a week, and have spent over 115 minutes on the phone, with the last two calls assuring me with 100% certainty that the problem is now resolved, only to discover they are STILL not activated and I have to call them yet AGAIN. GRRRRRRRRR!!! This is why I run Linux for everything except for client projects. Ugh.