...because using advertising to fund TV is massively inefficient. Why waste the lives of talented creative people producing what most consider to be an irritation and they themselves claim does not induce anyone to buy anything? Those people could be doing something better (and I'll defend the moral absolutism if anyone wants me to. Starving babies.). Why not collect a smaller amount of money and have a few channels of quality programming with no breaks for our sponsors? And no product placement insulting our intelligence.
Maybe the average attention span might go up. Maybe our kids might grow up without turning into materialist consumer drones. Maybe it's actually immoral to try and influence someone's thought processes in the way advertisers do.
When I watch pay satellite channels like Sky I am amazed that anyone puts up with these constant rude interruptions. Know how long an episode of 24 really is? about 43 minutes. Friends? Those overpaid bloaters do about 17 minutes work per show.
I say to hell with all advertisers. Let them wither on the vine, one day we'll find away to edit out product placement, and dynamically overdub scipts. We'll killfile their brands because most of us would rather make our own minds up. And what we'll find is that without these scumbags our media will get a lot cheaper.
...I want to tag people. Or more specifically, their cars. Imagine the view in your windscreen-HUD, that arse who just cut you up gets yet another "Wanker!" sign on his car. And how long does it take him to get the insults off his vehicle? The knock-on effects in considerate driving could be immense.
Any biophysicists in the house? As far as I understand it, the amount of energy a given volume of tissue would absorb would fall off with the cube of the distance. So when I started worry about my cellphone I began to hold it with the antenna a couple of centimeters further from my head. If we assume the nearest I was previously getting the aerial to my brain was a centimeter, that's tripled the distance, and the energy goes down to 1/27th. This only applies to the peak, at the near point - obviously a few cm is not going to effect the levels at 15cm much, but then again, at that point the power will be much lower anyway.
But there must be much more sophisticated ways of figuring this out. And someone here must know all about it.
BTW, I believe my lab was once offered funding by a mobile phone company to look at the effects of the radiation on rats' brains. It was turned down because there wasn't freedom to publish the data. This is a big, related problem in science; we allow companies with vested interests to publish in our hallowed journals, but they can do ten experiments and only choose the ones that suit their accountants. Thus they can bias the canon of scientific knowledge in an area. I'm not saying it wouldn't already be biased, but it's something to be aware of when looking at data like this.
Napster is now a rich company. It's not a homebrew project by a bunch of hackers anymore. In its current form it has a conflict of interests with the industry, but ultimately they will find common ground and go secure. The real threat to the record companies comes from networks like Gnutella, Freenet and dnet. The latter will be a version of Gnutella which uses point-to-point encryption to make the whole process anonymous. And there is nothing RIAA or anyone else can do about that.
You can't generalize from this
on
Boo No More
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps the main reason for boo's failure is that it's hard enough buying clothes in real space, let alone on the web. Clothing is all about the combination of the specific item with a specific person's body, posture, ways of moving... Not even with a full cyberware body scan and the latest VR fabric engine would I commit to buying something to wear electronically. Books, software, music, food, lots of things, but not clothes, unless I was just buying a new one of something I already had.
The overly-technical website didn't help, true. In UK, at least, most potential customers hve 56k modems, if that. I couldn't get the thing to work even with a current M$ browser. But there are darker things to come. A friend who works in web design tells me the buzz now is all about richmedia. By which they mean loud banners that scramble all over the screen shouting out their soundtracks. In a battle for our consciousness, they're simply upping the noise to signal ratio.
It has been said that the internet sees censorship as damage and works around it. It is certainly the case that more anonymous systems will exist in which you would not be able to track down 'pirates' and there will be no central company for you to sue. By pursuing this suit you could end up looking like dinosaurs who need to wake up and smell the meteorite, and your Art vs Comodity posturing is idiotic when you have become rich through a business model in which record companies *sell* your product to fans at very high profit margins. My question is: Don't you think it's really the middlemen, the record companies, who are the real problem in the relationship between musicians and fans? I would certainly buy a lot of CD's if they didn't include the enormous cost of supporting those organisations.
These systems are not anonymous havens for paedophiles. The data packets are unencrypted, and the protocol is (for Gnutella) HTTP. A request for a file is sent in plain text with the name of that file. Anyone serving/receiving child pornography using these tools is not anonymous, their packets can be sniffed anywhere along the line. But those who want to control the flow of information always bring child porn into the euation. They know it elicits near-universal horror, on the back of which they can get more power than they would otherwise have got. One day we'll have strong encryption on all IP. It would have been nice if it weren't that way, but it's the control freaks, the censors and the capitalists who have made it happen, not a few sad old pervs.
Are you sure? good steganography is hard to detect, I can't imagine anyone getting a conviction based on the prosecution claiming that some picture of a rock contains the details of a bank job. Then again, the rest of the bill is so unreasonable you could be right.
Did I hear somebody say steganography? Your data may be encrypted or not, but if it does not look like it's data it is unlikely anyone will every ask you to decrypt it.
Listen bozo, your keyboard wouldn't type without the work of that Cambridge faggot Alan Turing. He also invented a certain AI test that I suspect you'd fail. More faggots in office, I say.
Yes, we have widescreen TV here in Great Britain, and jolly good watching it is too. Also, some of our buildings are more than 300 years old, our policement don't carry guns and white folks ride buses. Makes a change from all the "broadband has been free with twinkies (WTF are twinkies anyway) for over seventy years" hawking we have to put up with. (Score -100; Spleen)
OK I stand corrected (thanks), but functionally, the Communicator 9100 seems to do most of what the Revo does. I've never owned one but I've had a go, and it works elegantly. The only bit of the Revo I would want is the nice kbd.
So, a PDA that runs EPOC and connects to your mobile phone's modem via IRDA. That doesn't really have much of an advantage over a Nokia Communicator, a PDA that runs EPOC and *is* a mobile phone. jk
Slashdot Mirror
...it'll keep you nice and busy for longer before you realise there's nothing worth watching.
they're building orgonne accumulators!
www.modshack.co.uk have details of how to make your own modchip, even using a mobo or network adaptor to do the programming.
...because using advertising to fund TV is massively inefficient. Why waste the lives of talented creative people producing what most consider to be an irritation and they themselves claim does not induce anyone to buy anything? Those people could be doing something better (and I'll defend the moral absolutism if anyone wants me to. Starving babies.). Why not collect a smaller amount of money and have a few channels of quality programming with no breaks for our sponsors? And no product placement insulting our intelligence.
Maybe the average attention span might go up. Maybe our kids might grow up without turning into materialist consumer drones. Maybe it's actually immoral to try and influence someone's thought processes in the way advertisers do.
When I watch pay satellite channels like Sky I am amazed that anyone puts up with these constant rude interruptions. Know how long an episode of 24 really is? about 43 minutes. Friends? Those overpaid bloaters do about 17 minutes work per show.
I say to hell with all advertisers. Let them wither on the vine, one day we'll find away to edit out product placement, and dynamically overdub scipts. We'll killfile their brands because most of us would rather make our own minds up. And what we'll find is that without these scumbags our media will get a lot cheaper.
JK
...I want to tag people. Or more specifically, their cars. Imagine the view in your windscreen-HUD, that arse who just cut you up gets yet another "Wanker!" sign on his car. And how long does it take him to get the insults off his vehicle? The knock-on effects in considerate driving could be immense.
But there must be much more sophisticated ways of figuring this out. And someone here must know all about it.
BTW, I believe my lab was once offered funding by a mobile phone company to look at the effects of the radiation on rats' brains. It was turned down because there wasn't freedom to publish the data. This is a big, related problem in science; we allow companies with vested interests to publish in our hallowed journals, but they can do ten experiments and only choose the ones that suit their accountants. Thus they can bias the canon of scientific knowledge in an area. I'm not saying it wouldn't already be biased, but it's something to be aware of when looking at data like this.
Napster is now a rich company. It's not a homebrew project by a bunch of hackers anymore. In its current form it has a conflict of interests with the industry, but ultimately they will find common ground and go secure. The real threat to the record companies comes from networks like Gnutella, Freenet and dnet. The latter will be a version of Gnutella which uses point-to-point encryption to make the whole process anonymous. And there is nothing RIAA or anyone else can do about that.
The overly-technical website didn't help, true. In UK, at least, most potential customers hve 56k modems, if that. I couldn't get the thing to work even with a current M$ browser. But there are darker things to come. A friend who works in web design tells me the buzz now is all about richmedia. By which they mean loud banners that scramble all over the screen shouting out their soundtracks. In a battle for our consciousness, they're simply upping the noise to signal ratio.
It has been said that the internet sees censorship as damage and works around it. It is certainly the case that more anonymous systems will exist in which you would not be able to track down 'pirates' and there will be no central company for you to sue. By pursuing this suit you could end up looking like dinosaurs who need to wake up and smell the meteorite, and your Art vs Comodity posturing is idiotic when you have become rich through a business model in which record companies *sell* your product to fans at very high profit margins. My question is: Don't you think it's really the middlemen, the record companies, who are the real problem in the relationship between musicians and fans? I would certainly buy a lot of CD's if they didn't include the enormous cost of supporting those organisations.
These systems are not anonymous havens for paedophiles. The data packets are unencrypted, and the protocol is (for Gnutella) HTTP. A request for a file is sent in plain text with the name of that file. Anyone serving/receiving child pornography using these tools is not anonymous, their packets can be sniffed anywhere along the line. But those who want to control the flow of information always bring child porn into the euation. They know it elicits near-universal horror, on the back of which they can get more power than they would otherwise have got. One day we'll have strong encryption on all IP. It would have been nice if it weren't that way, but it's the control freaks, the censors and the capitalists who have made it happen, not a few sad old pervs.
Are you sure? good steganography is hard to detect, I can't imagine anyone getting a conviction based on the prosecution claiming that some picture of a rock contains the details of a bank job. Then again, the rest of the bill is so unreasonable you could be right.
Did I hear somebody say steganography? Your data may be encrypted or not, but if it does not look like it's data it is unlikely anyone will every ask you to decrypt it.
I read on The Register about Quanta making a webpad. They make notebooks for AST amongst others.
Listen bozo, your keyboard wouldn't type without the work of that Cambridge faggot Alan Turing. He also invented a certain AI test that I suspect you'd fail. More faggots in office, I say.
Yes, we have widescreen TV here in Great Britain, and jolly good watching it is too. Also, some of our buildings are more than 300 years old, our policement don't carry guns and white folks ride buses. Makes a change from all the "broadband has been free with twinkies (WTF are twinkies anyway) for over seventy years" hawking we have to put up with. (Score -100; Spleen)
OK I stand corrected (thanks), but functionally, the Communicator 9100 seems to do most of what the Revo does. I've never owned one but I've had a go, and it works elegantly. The only bit of the Revo I would want is the nice kbd.
So, a PDA that runs EPOC and connects to your mobile phone's modem via IRDA. That doesn't really have much of an advantage over a Nokia Communicator, a PDA that runs EPOC and *is* a mobile phone. jk
The trouble with CF though is that it's so small you can lose it under the fluff in your pocket.