Not only that, but when you become the most reliable source for those 100,000 lesser-known items, customers will tend to come back to you for the hits as well.
It's not about the networks needing cash, it's about the progress of their relationships with the two major revenue streams, advertisers and cable/satellite distributors. The advertisers will have a new stick to beat them up with over advertising rates, so thier other main option to increase profits will be to pressure distributors on content fees.
I agree that a reduction in ad-supported content would be great. Personally, I think that particularly in the news and childrens' programming areas, it leads to a genuine corruption of the intended mission of the service.
I would think the first impact would be for advertisers to demand lower prices, since they'll be able to say that their ads aren't hitting as many eyeballs as the content providers thought they did.
That will lead to the content providers going after the distributors (cable/satellite) to make up for the shortfall. The distributors will then pass that through to your monthly bill. The alternative there is for the networks to realize that their shows aren't really worth paying actors $100,000+ per episode, and hit them in the pocketbook...
The cable company pays fees to the content providers to get their channels as part of their package. So yes, part of your monthly cable/satellite bill goes directly to the content providers for your ESPN, HGTV, TLC, etc.
A lawyer representing Universal Pictures and the Motion Picture Association of America informed the 30-year-old software developer that they were suing him for downloading Meet the Fockers over BitTorrent.
It would be interesting to see the actual complaint, to clarify whether TFA is incorrect or incomplete. Whether he was uploading or not, the distinction you note regarding the complaint is important.
That's not surprising - we had a consultant on our project go back to India on a 3-week vacation, which got extended another 6 weeks because his name was on the "do not fly" list. It took him that long to get his identify clarified and his visa restored, along with monumental efforts on our end to work through Senatorial offices, etc. to try and clear through the red tape.
And in the end, our company's legal advisors said that 6 weeks should be considered a very quick turnaround under the circumstances...
In retail environments, the VAST majority of "inventory shrinkage" is shoplifting, and the last I recall, washers don't spoil. If the washers are $0.25, and they are charged $0.15 + 1.5% for the debit as an earlier post states, then they are indeed clearing a hair less than $0.10.
Besides keeping the inventory properly up-to-date, the debit transaction also records the sale, which helps the retailer with their demand statistics. The point about shoplifting being preferable makes for a funny line, but it just doesn't hold up.
At least the store gets something, and their inventory is kept up to date. Shoplifting fails on both counts, there.
Those kinds of purchases are "loss leaders" for a store like that. They know that those small sales don't make them money, but they get customers coming back to their store later when they need something bigger.
What you're speaking of is a huge problem - IT knowledge can be learned through school, training, etc., but industry knowledge generally only comes through experience working on cross-functional projects that expose you to the whole organization. Unfortunately for most techies, good project management means bringing the right resources to bear on the right tasks at the right time, which argues against bringing tech staff into the requirements gathering activity (which is often where the rocks get lifted and you see just how ugly the business really is).
What it takes are open minded managers (yes, they are out there) who are willing to open a seat at the table to techies on a regular basis. In my last job, I was the only systems person stationed at a distribution center (part of a global business), so was considered part of the DC management team and participated in all their review and planning sessions. It made me much more effective in meeting the business needs, and also beefed up my credentials invaluably.
In short, I recommend to IT folks to ask questions about the business side of things, and why particular requests are being made. It's common sense - as an IT professional, try to understand your customers' needs, otherwise you'll wake up one day and find yourself being tossed to the curb.
In the industrial setting you refer to, you can maintain a staff of master mechanics to craft replacements parts and perform repairs when needed (sure, sometimes you may need to bring in outside help, but for day-to-day, it works). A few years ago I supported a distribution center in Indianapolis which ran on that same model. They had cheap forklifts from the early 70's, and had two mechanics on staff who maintained them in-house. You're right, at some point, it becomes the wise financial choice to bring in new equipment and reduce the maintenance group, but those kinds of situations tend to linger far longer than you'd expect (there's always a hotter project to spend that capital on).
When it comes to modern technology, however, the majority of commercial software doesn't include the source code, so you're left at the mercy of the vendor.
One part of the productivity gains that we have enjoyed in the US over the last 15 years or so have come from layoffs - it's a well-documented case of exactly what you're saying. Layoffs target the less productive aspects of a business, thus raising overall output per worker.
The biggest problem is tracking the click through to the action verifiably. Once a user clicks and ad and goes to WidgetsForSale.Com, the WidgetsForSale folks would need to track their activity and determine whether a sale results (q: within how long?), and report those sales results to Google so they can pay for the ads. That doesn't sound like a very tenable model - it relies on the WidgetsForSale folks tracking data and reporting to Google how much they should pay, rather than Google billing them.
The only way I could see that working is with mandated use of the Google payment system perhaps, so they could generate some link between ad clicks and purchasing activity. That seems a mighty steep hill to climb, however...
That wording may prevent it from becoming a precedent. It sounds like the panel didn't want to get into that issue, rather than make a firm declaration that bloggers should be treated as professional journalists. IANAL, but I would guess that it would take an appeal by Apple on that specific point to get them to probe that question further, and it sounds like Apple's not going down that road.
That's great, but if I've got one of these things, if I'm sitting 6KM away from the airport, couldn't I shoot down a plane as they're still pretty low at that point? Thus I'm outside the range of the defense system, but could still threaten aircraft.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only that, but when you become the most reliable source for those 100,000 lesser-known items, customers will tend to come back to you for the hits as well.
It's not about the networks needing cash, it's about the progress of their relationships with the two major revenue streams, advertisers and cable/satellite distributors. The advertisers will have a new stick to beat them up with over advertising rates, so thier other main option to increase profits will be to pressure distributors on content fees.
I agree that a reduction in ad-supported content would be great. Personally, I think that particularly in the news and childrens' programming areas, it leads to a genuine corruption of the intended mission of the service.
Why bother recreating deja vu in the laboratory? Are they too cheap to pay the cover charge?
I was gonna say, that's some crazy-ass deja vu...
I would think the first impact would be for advertisers to demand lower prices, since they'll be able to say that their ads aren't hitting as many eyeballs as the content providers thought they did.
That will lead to the content providers going after the distributors (cable/satellite) to make up for the shortfall. The distributors will then pass that through to your monthly bill. The alternative there is for the networks to realize that their shows aren't really worth paying actors $100,000+ per episode, and hit them in the pocketbook...
The cable company pays fees to the content providers to get their channels as part of their package. So yes, part of your monthly cable/satellite bill goes directly to the content providers for your ESPN, HGTV, TLC, etc.
It would be interesting to see the actual complaint, to clarify whether TFA is incorrect or incomplete. Whether he was uploading or not, the distinction you note regarding the complaint is important.
That's not surprising - we had a consultant on our project go back to India on a 3-week vacation, which got extended another 6 weeks because his name was on the "do not fly" list. It took him that long to get his identify clarified and his visa restored, along with monumental efforts on our end to work through Senatorial offices, etc. to try and clear through the red tape.
And in the end, our company's legal advisors said that 6 weeks should be considered a very quick turnaround under the circumstances...
But this case doesn't involve him uploading anything. They're going after him for allegedly downloading the flick.
Actually, the Supreme Court in recent years has made some key rulings in favor of states' rights, at the expense of the federal government.
In retail environments, the VAST majority of "inventory shrinkage" is shoplifting, and the last I recall, washers don't spoil. If the washers are $0.25, and they are charged $0.15 + 1.5% for the debit as an earlier post states, then they are indeed clearing a hair less than $0.10.
Besides keeping the inventory properly up-to-date, the debit transaction also records the sale, which helps the retailer with their demand statistics. The point about shoplifting being preferable makes for a funny line, but it just doesn't hold up.
It works on my big 'ole Blackberry. As they say in technical circles, "nyah, nyah, nyah-nyah, nyah..."
Are you kidding? Just wait for the story to appear on Slashdot regarding the update frequency of this service:
"I was driving along checking traffic on my cell phone, rear-ended someone in front of me, and my accident showed up on Google in just X minutes!"
At least the store gets something, and their inventory is kept up to date. Shoplifting fails on both counts, there.
Those kinds of purchases are "loss leaders" for a store like that. They know that those small sales don't make them money, but they get customers coming back to their store later when they need something bigger.
Idiot? Hardly. If you need the washers, you gotta pay for them, and a debit card is often the easiest way to do so. Cash is so pre-21st century...
What you're speaking of is a huge problem - IT knowledge can be learned through school, training, etc., but industry knowledge generally only comes through experience working on cross-functional projects that expose you to the whole organization. Unfortunately for most techies, good project management means bringing the right resources to bear on the right tasks at the right time, which argues against bringing tech staff into the requirements gathering activity (which is often where the rocks get lifted and you see just how ugly the business really is).
What it takes are open minded managers (yes, they are out there) who are willing to open a seat at the table to techies on a regular basis. In my last job, I was the only systems person stationed at a distribution center (part of a global business), so was considered part of the DC management team and participated in all their review and planning sessions. It made me much more effective in meeting the business needs, and also beefed up my credentials invaluably.
In short, I recommend to IT folks to ask questions about the business side of things, and why particular requests are being made. It's common sense - as an IT professional, try to understand your customers' needs, otherwise you'll wake up one day and find yourself being tossed to the curb.
In the industrial setting you refer to, you can maintain a staff of master mechanics to craft replacements parts and perform repairs when needed (sure, sometimes you may need to bring in outside help, but for day-to-day, it works). A few years ago I supported a distribution center in Indianapolis which ran on that same model. They had cheap forklifts from the early 70's, and had two mechanics on staff who maintained them in-house. You're right, at some point, it becomes the wise financial choice to bring in new equipment and reduce the maintenance group, but those kinds of situations tend to linger far longer than you'd expect (there's always a hotter project to spend that capital on).
When it comes to modern technology, however, the majority of commercial software doesn't include the source code, so you're left at the mercy of the vendor.
Too funny - I had no idea there was such a site, I was just making something up for the example.
One part of the productivity gains that we have enjoyed in the US over the last 15 years or so have come from layoffs - it's a well-documented case of exactly what you're saying. Layoffs target the less productive aspects of a business, thus raising overall output per worker.
The biggest problem is tracking the click through to the action verifiably. Once a user clicks and ad and goes to WidgetsForSale.Com, the WidgetsForSale folks would need to track their activity and determine whether a sale results (q: within how long?), and report those sales results to Google so they can pay for the ads. That doesn't sound like a very tenable model - it relies on the WidgetsForSale folks tracking data and reporting to Google how much they should pay, rather than Google billing them.
The only way I could see that working is with mandated use of the Google payment system perhaps, so they could generate some link between ad clicks and purchasing activity. That seems a mighty steep hill to climb, however...
That wording may prevent it from becoming a precedent. It sounds like the panel didn't want to get into that issue, rather than make a firm declaration that bloggers should be treated as professional journalists. IANAL, but I would guess that it would take an appeal by Apple on that specific point to get them to probe that question further, and it sounds like Apple's not going down that road.
That's great, but if I've got one of these things, if I'm sitting 6KM away from the airport, couldn't I shoot down a plane as they're still pretty low at that point? Thus I'm outside the range of the defense system, but could still threaten aircraft.
Missile targeting of planes has been a concern for a while, but I wonder if a 5KM radius is sufficient...
I'll bet they upgraded the inflatable autopilot from Airplane!
It was absurd of Cheney to say stupid shit like that, even worse when the (now outgoing) Treasury Secretary John Snow said the same thing.