Music publishers would cut up their reviews into five pages if reviews generated the page views that a Slashdot posting can provide. But the real problem is that this approach hurts the content immensely. I loathe clicking through more than one page on an article to the point where I don't want to keep reading, and I know I'm not alone. There is no purpose to cutting up an article that haphazardly beyond increasing ad views, which is highly opportunistic and discourages me from visiting a site in the future.
Particularly, a tech column that could have been condensed to one page rather than five. Furthermore, a "great blog entry" should be insightful, not commenting on screenshots regarding an overhyped and ultimately publicity-driven issue.
Gerry Stanhill who studied these declines worldwide in many papers (see references) coined the term "dimming". Dimming exists in sites all over the Former Soviet Union [2].
"The privacy and security of mail are core values of the Postal Service. Information from the contents or cover of any customer's mail may not be recorded, photocopied, filed, or otherwise collected or disclosed within or outside the Postal Service, except for Postal Service operations and law enforcement purposes as specified in 39 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 233.3 and Chapter 2 of the Administrative Support Manual." http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/hand/as353/a353c2_002 .html#vnameref_1
You know all those movie posters that quote "reviewers" and give trash movies "four thumbs WAY up!!!1"? Remember when it was exposed that they were shills?
I'm not into marketing, or being marketed to. I'd like to have someone try slightly harder to find out where I live, what my interests are, or my demographic data. I don't want to willingly hand it over to News Corp. Slashdot and other sites can have some of it because they inform me, but only as much as I see fit.
I don't fault the website for popularizing social networking (read: bulletin board systems). I don't fault it for being a rare conduit for perversion. I fault it for adding to a culture of too much information, too little privacy, and too many advertisements.
Somebody had to do it, of course, but that doesn't increase my support.
I don't understand how you can earn a living, or even complement one, from a site that, as of the time of this post, had one "bounty" out--finding a comprehensive Spanish/English online dictionary, for a dollar. The poster apparently has some trouble with Spanish and English.
Oh, and isn't this service essentially Google Answers with a more focused marketing campaign and no qualified staff?
Astrologers have been debating over the proper usage of Pluto for decades. Uranus and Neptune are also not a part of 'classical' astrology as it was originally defined. Fact is, most astrologers use everything from the Moon to far reaching outside sources like Charon, Sirius and even quasars if they feel like it.
Good point. If anything, raising or growing a cow in a way that is radically different from its 'natural' evolutionary pattern via some kind of disturbing lab technology creates ethical problems.
A hardline stance could easily be that if selective breeding for desireable traits is OK, then so should cloning of desireable traits. However, ethics is a study of grey areas, not obdurate lines in the sand.
Additionally, any desireable traits (better taste, less prone to disease, etc) that are cloned may turn out to be pestersome in the long run. Small genetic pools are more prone to diseases that may arise unexpectedly. An airborne spore that enters a lab, for instance, could kill thousands of specimens instantly rather than only affecting a third.
Also, cloning that occurs over an extended period hasn't been evaluated in a long term study. I'd hate to have cloning emulate in-breeding, for instance.
An inconvenient truth: That the iPod name will be genericized anyway (it already has been, arguably), whether they like it or not. You can't go around coining neologisms like "podcasting" and expect to reasonably argue a case that any manufacturer that uses the word "pod" in their branding is in violation of a trademark. Microsoft doesn't sue window manufacturers.
Actually, the term Senate appears exactly once in this article. It doesn't seem to highlight anything about Senate hearings, but about what the ESRB actually does. Which is to say not much. Which is exactly what I "trust" them to do.
Lets say, for the sake of argument, I'm a US police official specializing in using bomb-sniffing (and now DVD-sniffing) dogs. My best friend goes ballistic over a package marked for [insert media outlet here] and, upon opening the package, I find a screener copy of [insert over-hyped film, three weeks before release]. WWJD?
It doesn't matter who is overseeing sensitive media; a party with interests other than that of the industry will be there to snag a copy. On a side, the money spent on this project alone is probably not even close to the salary of a well-known celebrity for a three-week role, so it's probably in the best interest of the MPAA and, eventually, the RIAA (who will be opening all your mail from Amazon.com and the like) to start this project country-wide immediately. And to the comforted, who believe this is only for bulk-mail shipments, please think slightly harder.
Targeted advertising is possible in perhaps every known media and has been for years. If I'm the owner of a ski resort, would it make more sense for me to advertise in Business Week or Ski Monthly? CBS or the Travel Channel? Or the Weather Channel? Classical radio format or Sports radio format? Would I want to advertise when they're broadcasting about football or the Winter Olympics?
Don't forget, most of the reason there is so much choice (and so much that seems irrelevant to most) is so advertising can be better targeted. If no one was advertising, those choices wouldn't exist.
The spyware industry has become so devious that there is almost no way to keep your computer completely safe. For example, I'm relatively free of any malware most of the time, but tracking cookies always seem to make it on the machine. Even when you block the offending server altogether, it will just come from another.
If you're looking for a spyware-free experience, use lynx and mutt. Otherwise, you've just got to keep up your guard.
The tendency for journalists to frown at entertainment columnists is not unfounded. Columnists writing about movies, music, etc. often just take information from press releases and rewrite it. Or they take a 500 word column and write one sentence about fifty people each, with their names and something sensational they did in bold.
For many entertainment writers, the most investigative work they do is an interview with a singer or director, perhaps, and they're asking the same questions everyone else is. While plenty of journalists do the same thing regularly -- such as writing from a press release, or doing a fluff story -- they're often going out and tracking a story too; beating down people's doors and such. If something is hard for an entertainment editor or writer to get, they just move on to something else. They only leave the office for glad-handing luncheons.
Businesses are only going to respond to a problem by calling on the person/entity that is supposed to cover it, i.e. the one they're paying, Microsoft, in this case. They're not going to go around installing an independent patch willy-nilly on dozens of computers if it takes another day to get it from Microsoft. Many of these are small businesses without IT departments to advise them one way or the other. The important point here is that by waiting the extra day, a few of them are going to get burned badly and Microsoft will lose much of their trust.
Slashdot Mirror
The examples and perspective in this article or section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject.
Music publishers would cut up their reviews into five pages if reviews generated the page views that a Slashdot posting can provide. But the real problem is that this approach hurts the content immensely. I loathe clicking through more than one page on an article to the point where I don't want to keep reading, and I know I'm not alone. There is no purpose to cutting up an article that haphazardly beyond increasing ad views, which is highly opportunistic and discourages me from visiting a site in the future.
Particularly, a tech column that could have been condensed to one page rather than five. Furthermore, a "great blog entry" should be insightful, not commenting on screenshots regarding an overhyped and ultimately publicity-driven issue.
Mr. President, we must not allow a dimming gap!
Ahem.
2 .html#vnameref_1
"The privacy and security of mail are core values of the Postal Service. Information from the contents or cover of any customer's mail may not be recorded, photocopied, filed, or otherwise collected or disclosed within or outside the Postal Service, except for Postal Service operations and law enforcement purposes as specified in 39 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 233.3 and Chapter 2 of the Administrative Support Manual."
http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/hand/as353/a353c2_00
Which leaves a lot open to interpretation.
Doh, broken link.
That never happens.
That's nothing. How about a concerto with one of these:
http://www.henrylim.org/Harpsichord.html
Blizzard will be greeted as liberators.
I'm not into marketing, or being marketed to. I'd like to have someone try slightly harder to find out where I live, what my interests are, or my demographic data. I don't want to willingly hand it over to News Corp. Slashdot and other sites can have some of it because they inform me, but only as much as I see fit.
I don't fault the website for popularizing social networking (read: bulletin board systems). I don't fault it for being a rare conduit for perversion. I fault it for adding to a culture of too much information, too little privacy, and too many advertisements.
Somebody had to do it, of course, but that doesn't increase my support.
I don't understand how you can earn a living, or even complement one, from a site that, as of the time of this post, had one "bounty" out--finding a comprehensive Spanish/English online dictionary, for a dollar. The poster apparently has some trouble with Spanish and English.
Oh, and isn't this service essentially Google Answers with a more focused marketing campaign and no qualified staff?
Quite the primadonna, isn't we?!
I'd start looking elsewhere. If I wanted work to be like boot camp, I'd change my profession appropriately.
Astrologers have been debating over the proper usage of Pluto for decades. Uranus and Neptune are also not a part of 'classical' astrology as it was originally defined. Fact is, most astrologers use everything from the Moon to far reaching outside sources like Charon, Sirius and even quasars if they feel like it.
Good point. If anything, raising or growing a cow in a way that is radically different from its 'natural' evolutionary pattern via some kind of disturbing lab technology creates ethical problems.
A hardline stance could easily be that if selective breeding for desireable traits is OK, then so should cloning of desireable traits. However, ethics is a study of grey areas, not obdurate lines in the sand.
Additionally, any desireable traits (better taste, less prone to disease, etc) that are cloned may turn out to be pestersome in the long run. Small genetic pools are more prone to diseases that may arise unexpectedly. An airborne spore that enters a lab, for instance, could kill thousands of specimens instantly rather than only affecting a third.
Also, cloning that occurs over an extended period hasn't been evaluated in a long term study. I'd hate to have cloning emulate in-breeding, for instance.
An inconvenient truth: That the iPod name will be genericized anyway (it already has been, arguably), whether they like it or not. You can't go around coining neologisms like "podcasting" and expect to reasonably argue a case that any manufacturer that uses the word "pod" in their branding is in violation of a trademark. Microsoft doesn't sue window manufacturers.
Actually, the term Senate appears exactly once in this article. It doesn't seem to highlight anything about Senate hearings, but about what the ESRB actually does. Which is to say not much. Which is exactly what I "trust" them to do.
Sounds like a not-so-subtle Dashboard Confessional endorsement. Why not tell everyone to watch the funny cat jump video instead?
If you want to get any peace around the house you will. Apple Provides, You Relent.
Lets say, for the sake of argument, I'm a US police official specializing in using bomb-sniffing (and now DVD-sniffing) dogs. My best friend goes ballistic over a package marked for [insert media outlet here] and, upon opening the package, I find a screener copy of [insert over-hyped film, three weeks before release]. WWJD?
It doesn't matter who is overseeing sensitive media; a party with interests other than that of the industry will be there to snag a copy. On a side, the money spent on this project alone is probably not even close to the salary of a well-known celebrity for a three-week role, so it's probably in the best interest of the MPAA and, eventually, the RIAA (who will be opening all your mail from Amazon.com and the like) to start this project country-wide immediately. And to the comforted, who believe this is only for bulk-mail shipments, please think slightly harder.
Targeted advertising is possible in perhaps every known media and has been for years. If I'm the owner of a ski resort, would it make more sense for me to advertise in Business Week or Ski Monthly? CBS or the Travel Channel? Or the Weather Channel? Classical radio format or Sports radio format? Would I want to advertise when they're broadcasting about football or the Winter Olympics?
Don't forget, most of the reason there is so much choice (and so much that seems irrelevant to most) is so advertising can be better targeted. If no one was advertising, those choices wouldn't exist.
If you're looking for a spyware-free experience, use lynx and mutt. Otherwise, you've just got to keep up your guard.
The tendency for journalists to frown at entertainment columnists is not unfounded. Columnists writing about movies, music, etc. often just take information from press releases and rewrite it. Or they take a 500 word column and write one sentence about fifty people each, with their names and something sensational they did in bold.
For many entertainment writers, the most investigative work they do is an interview with a singer or director, perhaps, and they're asking the same questions everyone else is. While plenty of journalists do the same thing regularly -- such as writing from a press release, or doing a fluff story -- they're often going out and tracking a story too; beating down people's doors and such. If something is hard for an entertainment editor or writer to get, they just move on to something else. They only leave the office for glad-handing luncheons.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,124149,
Businesses are only going to respond to a problem by calling on the person/entity that is supposed to cover it, i.e. the one they're paying, Microsoft, in this case. They're not going to go around installing an independent patch willy-nilly on dozens of computers if it takes another day to get it from Microsoft. Many of these are small businesses without IT departments to advise them one way or the other. The important point here is that by waiting the extra day, a few of them are going to get burned badly and Microsoft will lose much of their trust.