Cut the bullshit of trying dictate when, where and how your customers are "permitted" to use the products they buy from you. Y'know, just like every other business on the planet.
The example I like to use:
When I buy a hammer, the manufacturer can't charge me a royalty for every nail I hammer in, they can't limit me to building bird-houses and demand licensing fees to build a shed, they can't tell me I can only use it in the town where I bought it and make me pay for it a second time if I want to use it in the next town over and they can't come to my home and take it away from me when they release an updated model. Heck, I can even use it for business and commercial profits and they still can't do anything about it.
They've sold me a product and they are now HANDS OFF until the hammer wears out and I'm in the market for a new one.
To argue against this -- to say that "media products" don't "wear out" -- is disingenuous and simply untrue. How many times can you listen to the song or watch the same movie without wanting more, better and newer?
The demand for new content will always exist, ergo it is unnecessary and incongruous to found your business model on the assumption that it won't.
I will offer this advice to the entire media industry, free of charge, no royalties asked, in the public domain, no nonsense, no copyright, you're free to use it. Forever.
How to Single-Handedly Obsolete Piracy and Earn Record Profits without Criminalizing your Customers and Building a PR Track Record Worse than Beelzebub's: provide video files in MPEG4/DivX/whatever reasonably universal format, without DRM expropriating our computers, for a reasonable price, offer fast download speeds (at least fast enough to stream) and offer it worldwide.
That is actually a lot simpler than it sounds; certainly a whole lot simpler than all that lawyering, backroom meetings and trying to figure out how to expropriate every computer in the world.
Not only will you have millions, possibly billions-with-a-B, customers who can't give you enough of their money, but you will be opening the door to scads of businesses who will make products that increase the value of your products and have customers begging to buy more.
This is evidenced empirically by history: look at how unencumbered VCRs, CDs and MP3s exploded with infinite third-party possibilities and compare them to DVDs which... well, can do nothing more than they did a decade ago because of crippling DRM.
Why is it so hard for these people to embrace technology? Why is every technological progression in history perceived as a threat? Is there a fundamental disconnect between them and their customers? Are they just stupid? Overly stubborn, technologically xenophobic dinosaurs? Too lazy to rework their business model? Too greedy about short-term profits too realize the long-term effects? What is it???
Right, but...
Are they going to even bother going after movie downloaders when the maximum they can extort is $5k? I mean, that won't even cover their legal fees for one case.
The more you offer for free, the more people expect for free. Something to do with perceived value and all that. It's a documented psycho-social phenomenon. People are stupid.
Clearly, they are calling with the expectation of free support -- you need to change this expectation. What I would suggest is to do everything you can to ensure that customers are aware of the support fees and rates *before* they call.
Where are they getting your phone number? Your website? The software "about" screen? Documentation? Put the pricing info in all of those places.
Various tonalities are associated with the specific emotions that we find either enjoyable or displeasureable, and music provokes these emotions involuntarily.
As described in the summary, clashing tones create a vibration or beating (this is empirically known by anyone who tunes musical instruments by ear) and cause a sense of disresolution and unrest.
Yeah, a lot of modern music is just random, manufactured crap, but truely talented artists select their musical tones, both deliberately and subconsciously, to tie in very closely with the lyrics (if applicable) and the emotions they intent to provoke.
you'll see that people with an IQ lower than 100 have a lot more babies than people with higher IQ. So it is not a surprise that overall there is a downward trend
Oooh, what's that law called, again... y'know the one about internet discussions devolving into a comparison between real life and Idiocracy?
Um... yeah. The more I think about it, the more I agree that this is likely the case.
As it's been mentioned several times here already, it's as simple as providing a flattened JPG or PNG as the assignment and requiring that students submit a completed PSD. Any competent "Photoshop teacher" would know this.
Leave it to Slashdot to come up with a miriad of Rube Goldberg solutions to a simple problem.
You're right, but why nuclear? Why not something that doesn't have the chance, however remote, of causing armageddon?
Would it be possible to power a home or office building with a roof of solar panels? What about a small windmill?
We should be also looking at ways of conserving energy. I'm not talking about BS lighting options like headache-inducing, depression-causing, carcinogen-containing fluorescents... but building and renovating buildings (homes, offices, schools, everything) to allow in as much natural light as possible during the day. Isn't it absurd that we use any artificial lighting at all during the eight or more hours a day when we this giant *free* light source just out the window?
Windows 8 is a toilet (remember, it's the "other version" every "every other version of Windows sucks") and they're forcing obsolescence on Windows 7 far too early.
I used to like VMWare, but then they binned the console and forced that gaudy and cumbersome web UI upon everyone. v1.x is still good, but it requires some security adjustments for Vista or newer. It's also a pain to install on Linux.
On that basis, I'd recommend VirtualBox. It's open source, painless to install anywhere (often available in Linux package repositories) and just as good as VMWare, if not better in some ways. It also includes a slick "seamless" mode that integrates the guest OS windows into the host desktop (a la Parallels).
It seems like we hear or read about a law proposal with incredulous consequences nearly everyday.
The incredible lack of forethought and even rudimentary logic is beyond my comprehension.
Do they even think about the problem beyond pandering to a misguided vocal minority? Do they even think about the innocent people it will catch in its wake? Do they even think AT ALL??
Maybe I'm just naive to think that they actually care about anyone outside of their rich cronies club.
All that super-clean mining, transporting of minerals all around the world, processing and manufacturing that is required for the batteries. From where do you think the power to recharge that battery twice a day comes? Fairy dust and unicorn farts?
And don't forget, the battery is only going to last a few years. Compare that to a typical gas or diesel car, which can easily last for decades with proper maintenance.
At best, electric cars are just shuffling pollution around, if not making the problem worse. Just because you can't see and smell it coming out the back of your car doesn't mean it isn't somewhere.
There's no such thing as pollution-free energy, and the notion of powering cars by electricity is certainly no more ingenious than that of by gas or diesel. But it's a whole lot easier to sell to the eco-hipster market, as most people are too lazy to research anything beyond what is presented to them.
Dogs are so endlessly fascinated with each other, the drug sniffers would be too enthralled and distracted to find anything;)
Joking aside, the court should most definitely conclude that such unwarranted searches are unconstitutional. It may be an extremely small victory, but it's a start.
Slashdot Mirror
Man, where's the "+1 Depressing" mod when you need it...
Now I wish I had posted as AC and had mod points ... because that's a good answer and probably correct.
The example I like to use:
I will offer this advice to the entire media industry, free of charge, no royalties asked, in the public domain, no nonsense, no copyright, you're free to use it. Forever.
... well, can do nothing more than they did a decade ago because of crippling DRM.
How to Single-Handedly Obsolete Piracy and Earn Record Profits without Criminalizing your Customers and Building a PR Track Record Worse than Beelzebub's: provide video files in MPEG4/DivX/whatever reasonably universal format, without DRM expropriating our computers, for a reasonable price, offer fast download speeds (at least fast enough to stream) and offer it worldwide.
That is actually a lot simpler than it sounds; certainly a whole lot simpler than all that lawyering, backroom meetings and trying to figure out how to expropriate every computer in the world.
Not only will you have millions, possibly billions-with-a-B, customers who can't give you enough of their money, but you will be opening the door to scads of businesses who will make products that increase the value of your products and have customers begging to buy more.
This is evidenced empirically by history: look at how unencumbered VCRs, CDs and MP3s exploded with infinite third-party possibilities and compare them to DVDs which
Why is it so hard for these people to embrace technology? Why is every technological progression in history perceived as a threat? Is there a fundamental disconnect between them and their customers? Are they just stupid? Overly stubborn, technologically xenophobic dinosaurs? Too lazy to rework their business model? Too greedy about short-term profits too realize the long-term effects? What is it???
Would be nice if us proles could get out of a manslaughter charge by relinquishing a mere 3% of our equity.
Right, but... Are they going to even bother going after movie downloaders when the maximum they can extort is $5k? I mean, that won't even cover their legal fees for one case.
The more you offer for free, the more people expect for free. Something to do with perceived value and all that. It's a documented psycho-social phenomenon. People are stupid.
Clearly, they are calling with the expectation of free support -- you need to change this expectation. What I would suggest is to do everything you can to ensure that customers are aware of the support fees and rates *before* they call.
Where are they getting your phone number? Your website? The software "about" screen? Documentation? Put the pricing info in all of those places.
Have mom do it.
And do you have any links citing death-by-windmill?
"No, I don't have any kids."
At least until it becomes illegal to answer untruthfully.
So, can they charge people for having a Kleenex box that's not buckled in?
What's so complex about "burning hatred"?
Strikes again!
Various tonalities are associated with the specific emotions that we find either enjoyable or displeasureable, and music provokes these emotions involuntarily.
As described in the summary, clashing tones create a vibration or beating (this is empirically known by anyone who tunes musical instruments by ear) and cause a sense of disresolution and unrest.
Yeah, a lot of modern music is just random, manufactured crap, but truely talented artists select their musical tones, both deliberately and subconsciously, to tie in very closely with the lyrics (if applicable) and the emotions they intent to provoke.
Oooh, what's that law called, again... y'know the one about internet discussions devolving into a comparison between real life and Idiocracy?
Um ... yeah. The more I think about it, the more I agree that this is likely the case.
As it's been mentioned several times here already, it's as simple as providing a flattened JPG or PNG as the assignment and requiring that students submit a completed PSD. Any competent "Photoshop teacher" would know this.
Leave it to Slashdot to come up with a miriad of Rube Goldberg solutions to a simple problem.
You're right, but why nuclear? Why not something that doesn't have the chance, however remote, of causing armageddon?
Would it be possible to power a home or office building with a roof of solar panels? What about a small windmill?
We should be also looking at ways of conserving energy. I'm not talking about BS lighting options like headache-inducing, depression-causing, carcinogen-containing fluorescents ... but building and renovating buildings (homes, offices, schools, everything) to allow in as much natural light as possible during the day. Isn't it absurd that we use any artificial lighting at all during the eight or more hours a day when we this giant *free* light source just out the window?
First, a headline and one sentence about someone accused of murder, then it goes off on a complete, random tangent about butt-drugs?
Is it too much to expect a summary that is related to the headline? Seriously, guys, this is getting pathetic.
Because they'll have to.
Windows 8 is a toilet (remember, it's the "other version" every "every other version of Windows sucks") and they're forcing obsolescence on Windows 7 far too early.
I'm getting my body armour, dread wigs and spiky face masks now before they all sell out!
I used to like VMWare, but then they binned the console and forced that gaudy and cumbersome web UI upon everyone. v1.x is still good, but it requires some security adjustments for Vista or newer. It's also a pain to install on Linux.
On that basis, I'd recommend VirtualBox. It's open source, painless to install anywhere (often available in Linux package repositories) and just as good as VMWare, if not better in some ways. It also includes a slick "seamless" mode that integrates the guest OS windows into the host desktop (a la Parallels).
It seems like we hear or read about a law proposal with incredulous consequences nearly everyday.
The incredible lack of forethought and even rudimentary logic is beyond my comprehension.
Do they even think about the problem beyond pandering to a misguided vocal minority? Do they even think about the innocent people it will catch in its wake? Do they even think AT ALL??
Maybe I'm just naive to think that they actually care about anyone outside of their rich cronies club.
Um ... hey guys?
I'm pretty sure he was actually expressing his relief regarding "no more" election coverage.
But don't that spoil a good argument about, um, election coverage ... aw, dang.
I'm posting from a Linux on ARM device right now.
Uh-huh.
All that super-clean mining, transporting of minerals all around the world, processing and manufacturing that is required for the batteries. From where do you think the power to recharge that battery twice a day comes? Fairy dust and unicorn farts?
And don't forget, the battery is only going to last a few years. Compare that to a typical gas or diesel car, which can easily last for decades with proper maintenance.
At best, electric cars are just shuffling pollution around, if not making the problem worse. Just because you can't see and smell it coming out the back of your car doesn't mean it isn't somewhere.
There's no such thing as pollution-free energy, and the notion of powering cars by electricity is certainly no more ingenious than that of by gas or diesel. But it's a whole lot easier to sell to the eco-hipster market, as most people are too lazy to research anything beyond what is presented to them.
Dogs are so endlessly fascinated with each other, the drug sniffers would be too enthralled and distracted to find anything ;)
Joking aside, the court should most definitely conclude that such unwarranted searches are unconstitutional. It may be an extremely small victory, but it's a start.