We are turning into the society Burke feared. One dominated by emotive, shallow views which applies naive levelling reason to all problems it encounters
2.a.1. The kinds of operation for which the aircraft is approved must be established and limitations and information necessary for safe operation, including environmental limitations and performance, must be established.
The rules are pretty much the same (there is a joint EASA and FAA committee to ensure they are aligned), and the FAR's are well known to Europeans and the world, where people may be less familiar with the EASA layout.
Here is the EASA regulation: very similar, but using more words.
1.c.2. The aircraft, including those systems, equipment and appliances required for type-certification, or by operating rules, must function as intended under any foreseeable operating conditions, throughout, and sufficiently beyond, the operational envelope of the aircraft, taking due account of the system, equipment or appliance operating environment. Other systems, equipment and appliance not required for type-certification, or by operating rules, whether functioning properly or improperly, must not reduce safety and must not adversely affect the proper functioning of any other system, equipment or appliance. Systems, equipment and appliances must be operable without needing exceptional skill or strength.
1.c.3. The aircraft systems, equipment and associated appliances, considered separately and in relation to each other, must be designed such that any catastrophic failure condition does not result from a single failure not shown to be extremely improbable and an inverse relationship must exist between the probability of a failure condition and the severity of its effect on the aircraft and its occupants. With respect to the single failure criterion above, it is accepted that due allowance must be made for the size and broad configuration of the aircraft and that this may prevent this single failure criterion from being met for some parts and some systems on helicopters and small aeroplanes.
1.c.5. Design precautions must be taken to minimise the hazards to the aircraft and occupants from reasonably probable threats, both inside and external to the aircraft, including protecting against the possibility of a significant failure in, or disruption of, any aircraft appliance.
Each engine costs about $7M to overhaul. If you're on a Boeing 777-400 that is $14M between 400 passengers adding about $35,000 each to your air fare. Approach the airline with $35,000 and I'm sure they'd get you home, one way or another.
He is also going to be screwed by his engine repair facilities. Most airlines operate a 'power by the hour' arrangement for their engines with an Engine Overhaul facility (Maintenance Repair Organization (MRO) where they pay a fixed amount per flying hour. This comes with many conditions including "thou shalt not fly through volcanic ash".
Come time to send the engine in for overhaul (after about operating 30,000hrs) if there is sufficient evidence of turbine erosion that can be attributed to volcanic ash then the airline will be stuck with the US$7M per engine invoice. My college (who deals with engine health monitoring and MRO's) reckons a medium sized airlines may be in the hole for US$2B should they're engines be exposed to ash.
Branson is being a doosh on this one, and should thank his lucky stars the regulators kept him out of the sky.
Agree, and the argument is more fundamental than that.
Federal Aviation Regulation 25.1309 relates to airworthiness standards for aircraft, and the fundamental aspect of this regulation is system safety. Excerpt below, with emphasis:
(a)The equipment, systems, and installations whose functioning is required by this subchapter, must be designed to ensure that they perform their intended functions under any foreseeable operating condition.
(b) The airplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed so that--
(1) The occurrence of any failure condition which would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane is extremely improbable, and
[(2) The occurrence of any other failure condition which would reduce the capability of the airplane or the ability of the crew to cope with adverse operating conditions is improbable.
Firstly, Aircraft are not designed to fly through clouds of corrosive silica ash.
Secondly, 'Extremely improbable' is defined in the Advisory Circular (AC 25.1309) to that regulation, which requires chance of catastrophic loss to be less than "extremely improbable" or "1x10^-9" chance of total loss. Techniques such as Fault Tree Analysis are used to allocate reliability of systems to sub-systems, so the entire aircraft can be built from components with realistic reliabilities. However, the volcanic ash offers a 'common mode' failure across all engines including gas turbine Auxiliary Power Units.
The regulators have an obligation to ensure the chance of total loss of an aircraft due to flying through an ash cloud remains 'extremely improbable', i.e 1x10^-9.
Also, if the airlines lost an aircraft because they were allowed to go flying, and were being sued by the families of the victims, they'd be screaming blue murder at the regulators saying they didn't do enough to protect the airlines.
Nothing to stop you sharing movies now. Just provides a small barrier for the casual user, and becomes a PITA. a $5 download will hopefully match the small barrier so the legal option becomes popular *enough*. Nothing will stop the dedicated pirate. So lower the barrier to purchase and provide something to discourage sharing by casual users.
at least I'm offering solutions.... It is very easy to find a reason not to do something, more difficult to overcome the barriers and change the views of nay-sayers.
Much like that time you tried to tell your mom you were moving out of her basement...
700 MB? I don't even bother downloading anything anymore that isn't atleast 720p (and hence 4 GB+).
Tiered pricing.
An Ad? My name on the movie? So I will need to strip them before they become useful to me. I won't be able to you say? Then I don't want their format at all.
A ad based on your prior purchases (re:netflix algorithm). You only need to strip off your personal information if you're sharing them. Nothing to stop you doing that. Nothing to stop you sharing movies now. Just provides a small barrier for the casual user, and becomes a PITA. $5 a download will hopefully match the small barrier so the legal option becomes popular *enough*. Nothing will stop the dedicated pirate. So lower the barrier to purchase and provide something to discourage sharing by casual users.
No, no, no. If I'm paying $5 for the god damn movie I do not want to be advertised at, in any way shape or form.
Either make it "free" and ad supported, or pay and ad-free.
What if the ad was a single recommendation inserted prior to download based on previous movies you'd watched an an algorithm similar to netflix?
Personally I'd find it less obnoxious. If I'd already bought (i mean licensed) the recommended movie it might drive me to watch it again, which then recommends another movie which i may or may not have already purchased (i mean licensed)
Choice of codec doesnt matter too much, the point i was making is that it should be common and not encumbered with DRM. A 700mb 480p file is good enough for most people and would allow them to charge more for HD. They could offer a choice of format perhaps. mkv, xvid, mp4, wmv, etc.
The service you described pretty much already exists (give or take): Netflix...
That is not the point. The point is to add a barrier for the casual user, (albeit a low one for someone with video editing software). It's not like the current DRM barriers are effective, this just means once someone builds up their collection they might think twice about sharing it. (or at least double check they removed the offending frames from all their video files - PITA)
quote]You cannot compete with P2P by attacking it. You can only compete with it by providing a better experience (or at least a comparable experience) through legal channels for a price that the market is willing to bear. Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts. That alone will take a huge chunk out of P2P.
Start by offering 700MB XVID downloads for about USD$5 from fast servers with fantastic bandwidth.
In the movie file, show one add for an upcoming movie, then show the credit card details and user account information for about 5 seconds. "this copy of $movie is licenced to $name $address $credit_card_number" . The customer will protect your movies with the same level of care as their card information, and will share it at their own risk or have to go to the hassle of editing the information out before putting it on p2p.
As parent said, only by competing with the product (p2p) will the movie companies win. And they have a chance to make some big money off that 'long tail'. Apply suitable methods to discourage sharing, and consumption will increase. Using this method, the movie industry would kill TV and make Billions.
This legislation is just going to blow up in our face as soon as other countries start demanding that we rat out our citizens for "criminal" activity (e.g. dissent, political freedom, etc.)
i'd guess it's more targeted at illegal activity such as 'piracy' and 'copyright infringement'. This smacks of RIAA/MPAA and leverage against countries such as Sweden for their lack of ability to close down The Pirate Bay.
"Ironically, the US love of guns and the kneejerk tendency to suggest violence as the solution to issues of governance means that of all the democracies in the world, the US population is amongst the most compliant of all populations toward their government."
One of the most insightful statements I've seen in a long time.
but, but, but... according to MPAA and RIAA doctrine, for every copy you distribute you're depriving someone in the market of the original. If you sell or give away 100 copies you've ripped the artist off over $100,000,000.... that he would have made selling originals...
They should also look for any images where a movie was being played in the background. The MPAA can sue them for $lots of money for infringement and distribution.
I'm sure there will be a $1000 cable from Monster that has 'no analogue holes'. "Use this for your composite video to ensure you get the best composite signal with no analogue holes" Buyers will SWEAR their 480i show 'looks as good as HD'. I love Monster Cable, they collect 'stupid tax'.
how do you manage your data retention policy, backups, disaster recovery, etc with gmail? Hope and pray that Google maintain their free service to a standard your business expects?
Perhaps gmail forwards everything to a company hotmail account.
Slashdot Mirror
Angel Investors: bringing money to people with good ideas.
I blame Fox News.
Here is the EASA regulation: very similar, but using more words.
Each engine costs about $7M to overhaul. If you're on a Boeing 777-400 that is $14M between 400 passengers adding about $35,000 each to your air fare. Approach the airline with $35,000 and I'm sure they'd get you home, one way or another.
He is also going to be screwed by his engine repair facilities. Most airlines operate a 'power by the hour' arrangement for their engines with an Engine Overhaul facility (Maintenance Repair Organization (MRO) where they pay a fixed amount per flying hour. This comes with many conditions including "thou shalt not fly through volcanic ash".
Come time to send the engine in for overhaul (after about operating 30,000hrs) if there is sufficient evidence of turbine erosion that can be attributed to volcanic ash then the airline will be stuck with the US$7M per engine invoice. My college (who deals with engine health monitoring and MRO's) reckons a medium sized airlines may be in the hole for US$2B should they're engines be exposed to ash.
Branson is being a doosh on this one, and should thank his lucky stars the regulators kept him out of the sky.
Federal Aviation Regulation 25.1309 relates to airworthiness standards for aircraft, and the fundamental aspect of this regulation is system safety. Excerpt below, with emphasis:
Firstly, Aircraft are not designed to fly through clouds of corrosive silica ash.
Secondly, 'Extremely improbable' is defined in the Advisory Circular (AC 25.1309) to that regulation, which requires chance of catastrophic loss to be less than "extremely improbable" or "1x10^-9" chance of total loss. Techniques such as Fault Tree Analysis are used to allocate reliability of systems to sub-systems, so the entire aircraft can be built from components with realistic reliabilities. However, the volcanic ash offers a 'common mode' failure across all engines including gas turbine Auxiliary Power Units.
The regulators have an obligation to ensure the chance of total loss of an aircraft due to flying through an ash cloud remains 'extremely improbable', i.e 1x10^-9.
Also, if the airlines lost an aircraft because they were allowed to go flying, and were being sued by the families of the victims, they'd be screaming blue murder at the regulators saying they didn't do enough to protect the airlines.
Exactly. Oh wait....
Ever heard of second moment of area, used in mechanical engineering?
Its units are to the fourth power. i.e m^4, mm^4 etc.
This has always messed with my mind.
Ever tried one of those cards on Newegg?
at least I'm offering solutions.... It is very easy to find a reason not to do something, more difficult to overcome the barriers and change the views of nay-sayers.
Much like that time you tried to tell your mom you were moving out of her basement...
Tiered pricing.
A ad based on your prior purchases (re:netflix algorithm). You only need to strip off your personal information if you're sharing them. Nothing to stop you doing that. Nothing to stop you sharing movies now. Just provides a small barrier for the casual user, and becomes a PITA. $5 a download will hopefully match the small barrier so the legal option becomes popular *enough*. Nothing will stop the dedicated pirate. So lower the barrier to purchase and provide something to discourage sharing by casual users.
No, no, no. If I'm paying $5 for the god damn movie I do not want to be advertised at, in any way shape or form.
Either make it "free" and ad supported, or pay and ad-free.
What if the ad was a single recommendation inserted prior to download based on previous movies you'd watched an an algorithm similar to netflix?
Personally I'd find it less obnoxious. If I'd already bought (i mean licensed) the recommended movie it might drive me to watch it again, which then recommends another movie which i may or may not have already purchased (i mean licensed)
Choice of codec doesnt matter too much, the point i was making is that it should be common and not encumbered with DRM. A 700mb 480p file is good enough for most people and would allow them to charge more for HD. They could offer a choice of format perhaps. mkv, xvid, mp4, wmv, etc.
The service you described pretty much already exists (give or take): Netflix...
That is not the point. The point is to add a barrier for the casual user, (albeit a low one for someone with video editing software). It's not like the current DRM barriers are effective, this just means once someone builds up their collection they might think twice about sharing it. (or at least double check they removed the offending frames from all their video files - PITA)
Start by offering 700MB XVID downloads for about USD$5 from fast servers with fantastic bandwidth.
In the movie file, show one add for an upcoming movie, then show the credit card details and user account information for about 5 seconds. "this copy of $movie is licenced to $name $address $credit_card_number" . The customer will protect your movies with the same level of care as their card information, and will share it at their own risk or have to go to the hassle of editing the information out before putting it on p2p.
As parent said, only by competing with the product (p2p) will the movie companies win. And they have a chance to make some big money off that 'long tail'. Apply suitable methods to discourage sharing, and consumption will increase. Using this method, the movie industry would kill TV and make Billions.
This legislation is just going to blow up in our face as soon as other countries start demanding that we rat out our citizens for "criminal" activity (e.g. dissent, political freedom, etc.)
i'd guess it's more targeted at illegal activity such as 'piracy' and 'copyright infringement'. This smacks of RIAA/MPAA and leverage against countries such as Sweden for their lack of ability to close down The Pirate Bay.
FTFY
MS will change the name from "X Box Live" to the "XXX Box Live CLAM Shows!"?
One of the most insightful statements I've seen in a long time.
but, but, but ... according to MPAA and RIAA doctrine, for every copy you distribute you're depriving someone in the market of the original. If you sell or give away 100 copies you've ripped the artist off over $100,000,000.... that he would have made selling originals...
oh wait...
They should also look for any images where a movie was being played in the background. The MPAA can sue them for $lots of money for infringement and distribution.
I'm sure there will be a $1000 cable from Monster that has 'no analogue holes'. "Use this for your composite video to ensure you get the best composite signal with no analogue holes" Buyers will SWEAR their 480i show 'looks as good as HD'. I love Monster Cable, they collect 'stupid tax'.
how do you manage your data retention policy, backups, disaster recovery, etc with gmail? Hope and pray that Google maintain their free service to a standard your business expects?
Perhaps gmail forwards everything to a company hotmail account.
We need some kind of "moron-alyzer" test that locks out your internet access in case of stupidity.
I think those AOL disks are circumvention to the 'moron lockout'...
will they take away your license?
No, but if you copyright infringe three times they will...