I listen to FM radio... well, an FM radio station but as it's 100 miles away I listen on te internet. Do you really think they'd stay on the air if nobody was listening?
Neither does the subscriber bonus. And while I'm OT, would you consider capitalizing the first word in a sentence? It's much more readable than your childish "all lowercase". You may think it's "kewl" but it's not, it just makes you look like an uneducated moron.
Personally, I yearn for the days when every song an album used to be awesome. I'm not really sure what happened, but I have over 200 CDs mostly from the late 1960s and 1970s, and every single song on the CD is at least something I wouldn't want to hit the skip button on.
Oh, there were plenty of stinkers back then, but the ones that survived are the good ones. I know I bought plenty of albums in the late '60s I'd wished I hadn't, because the song I'd heard on the radio was the only one that didn't suck. I got to the point I'd only buy an album if I'd heard the whole album.
They say "90% of everything is crap," but actually 90% of everything NEW is crap; the crap dies in time but the good stuff lives on.
Their future now lies in following the movie industry by adding extra unskippable tracks at the beginning of the album that advertise other albums, contain public service message warnings about piracy and disclaimers like "the opinions expressed in the music you are about to hear do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the studio or music distribution service."
They can try, but people would stop buying again -- DRM was one reason they've been in a slump, and its absence is the biggest reason they're profitable again.
Expect Blu-Ray versions of albums to be released with 3-D music you can only hear with special glasses
Dude, crack is pretty bad for you. Put the pipe down! Stereo (and now surround sound) IS the "3D glasses".
Ignoring the history of them, how popular do you think regular "singles" would have been if they had came on full-size LPs, with just two tracks at the start, and 80% of the vinyl being totally blank?
Back in the analog days, singles were on 45s, seven inch disks with a song on each side. They were about a buck apiece when albums were four or five, and they sold a lot more 45s than albums.
There was at least one album with a single song on it, Jethro Tull's "Thick As A Brick." Of course, that one song is about 40 minutes long. One Allman Brothers double album had one of its 3 sides blank IIRC. And a few had one song on one side and four or five on the other, but the single on one side was a long cut (Iron Butterfly's "In A Gadda Da Vida and Quicksilver's "Who Do You Love" are two of them, there were many more).
Singer songwriters and performers are learning they don't need big labels as their music will pretty much advertise itself on social media and YouTube.
Actually, just the ones who are any good; now, only talentless hacks need the RIAA labels.
The labels have always (at least in my not short lifetime) been stupidly greedy. I learned by the time I was 14 never to buy an album based on one song I heard on the radio. It was "best of", "greatest hits" and "live" unless I heard the album. My crazy friend Tom turned me on to Hendrix, and I doubt I'll forget the day I heard Zepplin's first album. I walked into a record store as they were playing it on the day it was released, and "WOW! That's a good song." Then Communication Breakdown played, and "HOLY SHIT that song ROCKS!" Amazingly, every single song kicked ass. I didn't have to hear the second album to buy it.
The same was true of a lot of bands; I'd hear a great album at a friend's house and buy their whole catalog (which back then was never more than 3 or 4 albums).
Most folks back then didn't even bother with albums, and bought the 45 instead, even though the album only cost 4x as much and had >10x the songs.
The "not listening to albums" bit me in the ass sometimes; I bought "Tommy" on the basis that I'd never heard a bad song by The Who, listened to a little of each song and thought I'd been ripped off, until KSHE played the whole thing one day I was home sick.
There are people now who like songs from Floyd's "The Wall" who have never heard the whole album. They don't know what they're missing.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up, the RIAA is only a tiny part of the music industry. "We're the music industry" is just another of their lies.
TFA blames piracy for the RIAA's downfall, when study after study shows that pirates spend more on media than non-pirates. I'd say the boycott that the MSM never mentioned was one of the most successful boycotts in history, and certainly the most successful "underground" unpopularized (by MSM) one in history. Rather than piracy, anti-piracy had a big effect, as nobody wanted DRM. When free is better than paid and you are aware of that, why pay? I'm supposed to pay for a crippled item I don't really own when I can get a fully functional one for free? That's just crazy thinking.
Now that you can "buy" a non-crippled version for an almost reasonable price more easily than the free version, the boycott is (mostly) over.
MSM: He who controls the media controls the populace's minds. Is it any wonder the powers that be want to cripple the internet?
RTFA -- better stability and better mileage. TFA says there are two gyrocars headed for production now, and gyrocars have been built since at least 1914. My grandpa was twenty then, the Cubs won the world series two years earlier, the airplane was only 11 years old.
TFA says financing is what killed all the gyrocars.
Used to get a flu strain every year as a child. Those always seemed to be stomach bugs that made you vomit
That wasn't the flu, it was a stomach bug of some kind; norovirus, salmonella, etc. Influenza is a respiratory disease. The only time flu makes you puke is when you cough so hard and uncontrollably that the coughing triggers the vomiting. If you don't have a deep, wet cough with a fever and chills, you don't have the flu.
Ironically, I think the first Bush was a pretty good Republican. He was willing to violate his no tax pledge for the sake of the fiscal health of the country
I can't agree with that. He may and probably is very easy to get along with, but enriching his cronies at the expense of the entire economy is just wrong. Bush is an oil man, gasoline prices more than quadrupled during his Presidency, and that was one of the biggest causes of the great recession. Another was slashing taxes on the rich. Starting a war with Iraq because Hussein threatened his dad was both stupid and evil.
Obama has not changed many of Bush's policies (which is why I didn't vote for him in the last election
I voted Green Party for the same reason, but if Illinois had been a swing state I'd have voted for Obama just to keep Mister "fuck the 99%" out of office. If the Republicans had run anyone worth voting for I'd have voted for him, but they haven't run a decent candidate since Eisenhower.
I shouldn't have to hunt for the smallest punctuation mark there is while reading. It's fine if you move your lips when you read, not when you're used to reading books.
I'd hardly call Clinton a "model Christian", but it isn't up to me to judge him for his peccadillos. He probably is as good a Christian as me, I'm far from perfect even though I try (hell, I got seduced by a married woman last week). It seems that Christians make lousy Presidents; Carter seemed a good man, but he sucked as President. Of course, he didn't suck nearly as badly as Bush, who I don't think has a conscience.
My beef isn't spelling, it's starting sentences with lower case. The only time spelling bothers me is when it changes the meaning of the sentence ("The bank should loose their money"), and when it's obvious that a comment is written by someone barely literate ("They're house is on fire").
I didn't even notice the misspellings, it was the look of "this long paragraph is a single sentence". Periods don't stand out, upper case letters do.
As for formatting, you probably had it set to "HTML" rather than "plain text".
Sorry, but that wall of uncapitalized sentences is unreadable. Can someone translate that to written English for me?
That shift key is there for a reason. I don't struggle to read the newspaper and I'll be damned if I struggle to read a comment written by an alliterate.
If you think that was a misspelling or typo, google it.
Apologies to the moderators, but that crap annoys the hell out of me in a site supposedly for the educated.
You know, for an extra two bucks you can get almost a pound of Folgers or Maxwell House which perks pots and pots of coffee. His point is, if you're spending six bucks for a cup of something that costs pennies to make, bitching about an extra buck for quality honey is just stupid. Especially since that jar of honey will do you for months instead of hours.
If I were moderating you'd get a "funny".
It just struck me why people drive so stupid when I'm on my way to work -- they're racing to Starbucks, while I'm already well caffenated.
We already eat way too much sugar and meat anyway.
We? I'm not overweight (maybe even a little underweight), don't have diabetes or heart disease, so how could I possibly be eating too much meat and sweets?
A lot of people like their coffee sweet, and many of them put honey in their coffee. It seems to me that coffee honey in coffee would be damned good, if you like sweet coffee (I don't).
When I saw this story it made me wonder why we're importing honey in the first place. I googled how much honey is produced in the US, the American Beekeepers Federation says US production is down 13%, bee colonies are down 7%, and prices are up. The grocery store is probably importing Chinese honey because slave labor is cheap (by "slave labor" I mean wage slaves). Plus, do you check the label on the honey? I haven't bought honey in like forever, but it may well be that the label's fine print says something like "water, sugar, and syrup added". Who reads labels?
Personally, since I'm not impoverished I'd rather pay extra for domestically made (locally is even better). You're talking what, a buck or two? Saving a dollar on a jar of honey then spend as much at McDonalds for a quarter pounder with cheese and fries when a dozen raw hamburger patties, a loaf of bread, and a big bag of potatoes costs the same, and takes less time to cook than waiting in line at a fast food joint. It's insane to my mind.
Help your local economy, not some uber-rich multinational corporation.
I ran several hobby sites around the turn of the century, they cost a whopping $15 per YEAR. IIRC they even had a blogging-like template you could use, although I used my own HTML and javascript.
The difference between a hosted blog and a hosted server is you're paying for the server, even though the costs are miniscule. About the only way you can lose your site is a DMCA takedown, which can't happen if your host isn't in the US, or if the hosting company goes bankrupt. If that happens, you simply get another host, change the DNS values, and upload the site. Your visitors will only notice a few hours downtime, the site and URL remain the same. With a blog, a new host means a new URL and a different site design.
Slashdot Mirror
I listen to FM radio... well, an FM radio station but as it's 100 miles away I listen on te internet. Do you really think they'd stay on the air if nobody was listening?
"Karma bonus doesn't seem to work."
Neither does the subscriber bonus. And while I'm OT, would you consider capitalizing the first word in a sentence? It's much more readable than your childish "all lowercase". You may think it's "kewl" but it's not, it just makes you look like an uneducated moron.
Personally, I yearn for the days when every song an album used to be awesome. I'm not really sure what happened, but I have over 200 CDs mostly from the late 1960s and 1970s, and every single song on the CD is at least something I wouldn't want to hit the skip button on.
Oh, there were plenty of stinkers back then, but the ones that survived are the good ones. I know I bought plenty of albums in the late '60s I'd wished I hadn't, because the song I'd heard on the radio was the only one that didn't suck. I got to the point I'd only buy an album if I'd heard the whole album.
They say "90% of everything is crap," but actually 90% of everything NEW is crap; the crap dies in time but the good stuff lives on.
Their future now lies in following the movie industry by adding extra unskippable tracks at the beginning of the album that advertise other albums, contain public service message warnings about piracy and disclaimers like "the opinions expressed in the music you are about to hear do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the studio or music distribution service."
They can try, but people would stop buying again -- DRM was one reason they've been in a slump, and its absence is the biggest reason they're profitable again.
Expect Blu-Ray versions of albums to be released with 3-D music you can only hear with special glasses
Dude, crack is pretty bad for you. Put the pipe down! Stereo (and now surround sound) IS the "3D glasses".
Ignoring the history of them, how popular do you think regular "singles" would have been if they had came on full-size LPs, with just two tracks at the start, and 80% of the vinyl being totally blank?
Back in the analog days, singles were on 45s, seven inch disks with a song on each side. They were about a buck apiece when albums were four or five, and they sold a lot more 45s than albums.
There was at least one album with a single song on it, Jethro Tull's "Thick As A Brick." Of course, that one song is about 40 minutes long. One Allman Brothers double album had one of its 3 sides blank IIRC. And a few had one song on one side and four or five on the other, but the single on one side was a long cut (Iron Butterfly's "In A Gadda Da Vida and Quicksilver's "Who Do You Love" are two of them, there were many more).
Singer songwriters and performers are learning they don't need big labels as their music will pretty much advertise itself on social media and YouTube.
Actually, just the ones who are any good; now, only talentless hacks need the RIAA labels.
The labels have always (at least in my not short lifetime) been stupidly greedy. I learned by the time I was 14 never to buy an album based on one song I heard on the radio. It was "best of", "greatest hits" and "live" unless I heard the album. My crazy friend Tom turned me on to Hendrix, and I doubt I'll forget the day I heard Zepplin's first album. I walked into a record store as they were playing it on the day it was released, and "WOW! That's a good song." Then Communication Breakdown played, and "HOLY SHIT that song ROCKS!" Amazingly, every single song kicked ass. I didn't have to hear the second album to buy it.
The same was true of a lot of bands; I'd hear a great album at a friend's house and buy their whole catalog (which back then was never more than 3 or 4 albums).
Most folks back then didn't even bother with albums, and bought the 45 instead, even though the album only cost 4x as much and had >10x the songs.
The "not listening to albums" bit me in the ass sometimes; I bought "Tommy" on the basis that I'd never heard a bad song by The Who, listened to a little of each song and thought I'd been ripped off, until KSHE played the whole thing one day I was home sick.
There are people now who like songs from Floyd's "The Wall" who have never heard the whole album. They don't know what they're missing.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up, the RIAA is only a tiny part of the music industry. "We're the music industry" is just another of their lies.
TFA blames piracy for the RIAA's downfall, when study after study shows that pirates spend more on media than non-pirates. I'd say the boycott that the MSM never mentioned was one of the most successful boycotts in history, and certainly the most successful "underground" unpopularized (by MSM) one in history. Rather than piracy, anti-piracy had a big effect, as nobody wanted DRM. When free is better than paid and you are aware of that, why pay? I'm supposed to pay for a crippled item I don't really own when I can get a fully functional one for free? That's just crazy thinking.
Now that you can "buy" a non-crippled version for an almost reasonable price more easily than the free version, the boycott is (mostly) over.
MSM: He who controls the media controls the populace's minds. Is it any wonder the powers that be want to cripple the internet?
RTFA -- better stability and better mileage. TFA says there are two gyrocars headed for production now, and gyrocars have been built since at least 1914. My grandpa was twenty then, the Cubs won the world series two years earlier, the airplane was only 11 years old.
TFA says financing is what killed all the gyrocars.
Well, they can afford plenty of beer; I drink with a lot of NASCAR fans. There are NASCAR parties in most bars around here today.
Used to get a flu strain every year as a child. Those always seemed to be stomach bugs that made you vomit
That wasn't the flu, it was a stomach bug of some kind; norovirus, salmonella, etc. Influenza is a respiratory disease. The only time flu makes you puke is when you cough so hard and uncontrollably that the coughing triggers the vomiting. If you don't have a deep, wet cough with a fever and chills, you don't have the flu.
It worked for me, I'm 60 and didn't get the flu.
And I didn't even get a flu shot!
Ironically, I think the first Bush was a pretty good Republican. He was willing to violate his no tax pledge for the sake of the fiscal health of the country
I was referring to Junior.
Bush is a good guy
I can't agree with that. He may and probably is very easy to get along with, but enriching his cronies at the expense of the entire economy is just wrong. Bush is an oil man, gasoline prices more than quadrupled during his Presidency, and that was one of the biggest causes of the great recession. Another was slashing taxes on the rich. Starting a war with Iraq because Hussein threatened his dad was both stupid and evil.
Obama has not changed many of Bush's policies (which is why I didn't vote for him in the last election
I voted Green Party for the same reason, but if Illinois had been a swing state I'd have voted for Obama just to keep Mister "fuck the 99%" out of office. If the Republicans had run anyone worth voting for I'd have voted for him, but they haven't run a decent candidate since Eisenhower.
I shouldn't have to hunt for the smallest punctuation mark there is while reading. It's fine if you move your lips when you read, not when you're used to reading books.
I'd hardly call Clinton a "model Christian", but it isn't up to me to judge him for his peccadillos. He probably is as good a Christian as me, I'm far from perfect even though I try (hell, I got seduced by a married woman last week). It seems that Christians make lousy Presidents; Carter seemed a good man, but he sucked as President. Of course, he didn't suck nearly as badly as Bush, who I don't think has a conscience.
My beef isn't spelling, it's starting sentences with lower case. The only time spelling bothers me is when it changes the meaning of the sentence ("The bank should loose their money"), and when it's obvious that a comment is written by someone barely literate ("They're house is on fire").
I didn't even notice the misspellings, it was the look of "this long paragraph is a single sentence". Periods don't stand out, upper case letters do.
As for formatting, you probably had it set to "HTML" rather than "plain text".
Sorry, but that wall of uncapitalized sentences is unreadable. Can someone translate that to written English for me?
That shift key is there for a reason. I don't struggle to read the newspaper and I'll be damned if I struggle to read a comment written by an alliterate.
If you think that was a misspelling or typo, google it.
Apologies to the moderators, but that crap annoys the hell out of me in a site supposedly for the educated.
You know, for an extra two bucks you can get almost a pound of Folgers or Maxwell House which perks pots and pots of coffee. His point is, if you're spending six bucks for a cup of something that costs pennies to make, bitching about an extra buck for quality honey is just stupid. Especially since that jar of honey will do you for months instead of hours.
If I were moderating you'd get a "funny".
It just struck me why people drive so stupid when I'm on my way to work -- they're racing to Starbucks, while I'm already well caffenated.
Fresh honey? Gimme the sitting in your shelf for ages, crystallized and it's still good thing.
You can uncrystallize honey by heating.
We already eat way too much sugar and meat anyway.
We? I'm not overweight (maybe even a little underweight), don't have diabetes or heart disease, so how could I possibly be eating too much meat and sweets?
A lot of people like their coffee sweet, and many of them put honey in their coffee. It seems to me that coffee honey in coffee would be damned good, if you like sweet coffee (I don't).
When I saw this story it made me wonder why we're importing honey in the first place. I googled how much honey is produced in the US, the American Beekeepers Federation says US production is down 13%, bee colonies are down 7%, and prices are up. The grocery store is probably importing Chinese honey because slave labor is cheap (by "slave labor" I mean wage slaves). Plus, do you check the label on the honey? I haven't bought honey in like forever, but it may well be that the label's fine print says something like "water, sugar, and syrup added". Who reads labels?
Personally, since I'm not impoverished I'd rather pay extra for domestically made (locally is even better). You're talking what, a buck or two? Saving a dollar on a jar of honey then spend as much at McDonalds for a quarter pounder with cheese and fries when a dozen raw hamburger patties, a loaf of bread, and a big bag of potatoes costs the same, and takes less time to cook than waiting in line at a fast food joint. It's insane to my mind.
Help your local economy, not some uber-rich multinational corporation.
I suspect that many of them are closet atheists.
I ran several hobby sites around the turn of the century, they cost a whopping $15 per YEAR. IIRC they even had a blogging-like template you could use, although I used my own HTML and javascript.
The difference between a hosted blog and a hosted server is you're paying for the server, even though the costs are miniscule. About the only way you can lose your site is a DMCA takedown, which can't happen if your host isn't in the US, or if the hosting company goes bankrupt. If that happens, you simply get another host, change the DNS values, and upload the site. Your visitors will only notice a few hours downtime, the site and URL remain the same. With a blog, a new host means a new URL and a different site design.