There are basically two companies that act as middle men for broadcast music: ASCAP and BMI. Every radio station in the country (and major parts of the world) are REQUIRED to report playlists to these orginazations and pay royalties for the right to play music. What if we adopt the same model for napster-like distrubution? That way, you pay if you provide music to the Earth. How you make money is not their concern (origional content?), but The payment is usually very small (on a per song basis).
Of course, this could end the whole thing, since who wants to pay to offer a service?
Actually, it may be somewhat easy to shut down napster et. al. All you have to do is order ISPs to block the ports that these services use. Sure, it is a short term fix, but there is a way...
Oh, but they are different. Very different. You actually had to get out of your chair to change the channel on your (only) black and white television. You had to deal with extreme heat in the summer and cold drafts in the winter. Your kitchen just had a stove and a toaster. If you were well to do, you might have a HI-FI, but most of the world listened to music on tiny monoral speakers. Information came to you twice a day on newsprint (how primitave). The telephone was used for a few minutes at a time, lest you tie up the party line too long. As far as long distance goes, forget it! You can't afford to talk very long (witness talking to my grandmother, who constantly worries that I can't afford to call her on my one-rate cell phone). Oh, and people died every year due to carbon monoxide poisioning and house fires.
As far as a "personal server," which is what they are talking about, I'm finding more and more people who want new houses with data cable in mind (I work for a telecom company). They are putting it in for the simple reason that they don't know what is going to be happening, but they understand that there will be something down the road, and they need to become a part of it.
As far as need, well, what would you do with several gigs available to any multimedia terminal in the house? With an easy to configure/use interface to all your movies, music, and able to pull content from the Internet as well? Sounds like nerdvana now, but once people see this sort of thing, they want it.
Your point about evolution is well taken. There are known disadvantages to evolution of, for the prime example, life. Much of the human brain, for example, is wasted space. It holds the R-complex and limbic systems, which are really just reptile and mammalian brains, respectively. They hold no knowledge or useful information, but are still there because of evolution.
Actually, they are still in use today. I heard a story on NPR a few weeks ago about a doctor/researcher who found receptors in the front of human nostrils that feed directly to the limbic system. He also found that people who have had them damaged, due to nose jobs and similar events have a far different view of people based on first impressions than folks who still have them in place. His theory is that this is a possible explaination for "love at first site."
Most of these features are put together by low level drone programmers who desprately want to have some useful little addition, but it isn't part of the grand plan. So, they put 'em in, and if someone notices it, they may decide it is worth something and document it. Otherwise, it just hogs up more resources.
The Print Preview button in Office was started this way, from what I've heard. The guy working on the print formating had to walk down the hall to see his work, and thought it was easier to just look at the printout on his screen.
I'm committed to publishing at least the first two segments. Whether or not I publish more depends.
The wording of this reminds me of the show "Blackmail." For those of you who don't know, it was a skit on Monty Python. They would show a film of someone in a potentially bad position, with a counter running. When the person sweats enough and calls in, they stop the tape. Great fun!
It is unfortunate that more isn't said about how NASA of the 60's was structured. True it was based on military chain of command (as was most management structure of the day), but the idea that everyone involved knew exactly what their duty was, and it was rare that you strayed from your role. This was very clearly shown in Apollo 13 (the movie), and also in the HBO series _From_Earth_to_the_Moon_. Everyone involved in the Apollo missions, from the vendors to the astronauts to the guy cleaning the floors, knew exactly what they should be doing, and didn't have changes in their roles just because it suited management to have something done.
Compare this to the modern management structure: basically, do whatever we tell you. It doesn't matter if you should be doing what we hired you for, we want you to do this now. I have this happen to me all the time. I was hired to do a job with a description. However, it quickly became aparent to me that the "other duties as assigned" portion of the job description was much more important than the job I was hired for.
I used to think it was just the management of the company I work for, but after discussing this with some friends, it became clear that this happens everywhere.
The problem with this management style is that it promotes sloppy work. If I thought the job was going to be one thing (that I should like to do -why else would have I applied?), but it becomes something else (that I may not even have training to do), how good am I going to be?
I have also noticed the inverse is true: I work with people who are not doing what they are paid to do, only because they like that job more than their primary duties.
Of couse, there was also a very clear objective and process for meeting that objective.
Today's concept: "Cognitive Dissonance". Maybe there's no difference other than the fact that the audiophile says "damnit, I spent $200 on these s00per-s33kr1t speaker cables made from depleted uranium, and if I don't hear a difference, by God I'm gonna feel like an idiot! So I must be able to hear the difference! I don't care if it's beyond the oscilloscope's ability to detect it, any evidence that threatens my worldview is the work of the devil! I can hear the difference, I tell you!"
Have to agree on this one. I always piss off the audio sales "professionals" in the local shop when discussing cables. I ask a few simple questions, such as "What tests have been done on cable X that show it is better than cable Y?" Normally, they start talking about the construction, the connectors, etc. None of them can point to any testing done to see if the cable is any better. The only "scientific" answers are ususally from people who bought them, read something in a newsgroup of crazy audio freaks about "skin effect" and high frequency loss (even though skin effect doesn't exist at audio frequencies - only RF).
There's another reason for the cost of equipment being so high - a limited market. I worked for a company that found out it was cheaper to build our own equipment than to purchase from the 3 vendors (at the time - now there's only 1 and the first 3 are gone). It was estimated at the time that there were only about 12000 locations in the world that would be able to use said equipment (automated video playback devices). In order for them to make a profit, they had to charge through the nose. We then would have had to pass those charges on to the end customer to get the payback.
So, don't look for prices on CO equipment to come down anytime soon. If anything, they will go up, due to the fact that consolidation in the telecom world is happening much faster than ever before.
Yes, you can discriminate if there is just cause. For example, the company I work for has technicians going to customer's homes. You can bet that it is just fine for us to not hire people who have been convicted of a felony (do you want a convicted felon in your house?).
That's to illustrate how much line-of-sight issues will be relevant. Line-of-sight usually implies height (to get above trees and buildings and things), which usually makes things pretty difficult to intercept.
That reminds me of an engineer at a Denver TV station. He said the engineers who ran the mobile trucks carried maps with the best path for selected areas. Many of them bounced signals off the skyscrapers downtown!
I always thought the microwave transmitters they use would make excelent data transmitters (at the time, VBI was the fastest game in town). You'd need a license, but I don't think they are very expensive.
I thought the Cisco packet priority system was based on the type of packet, IE: Telephone, data, video, etc. This is so that links that can't have high latency (video, telephone) get pushed ahead of the ones that can wait (slashdot story).
Similarly, companies like General Electric and Siemens buy advertising that doesn't promote any of their products. The idea is to get a company's name out there.
Actually, GE sells stock with those ads. That's why you tend to see them on CNN and CNBC. If you are looking to invest, you may be watching those networks. CNBC is really interesting. If you want to sell stock, you appear on one of those shows that make the market look like a sporting event (squak box, etc). It has been shown that just a mention by one of those "experts" pushes the price up.
As for stadium sponsorships, it is the same thing. Why does Alcoa buy a sign in 3 Rivers Stadium in Pittsburgh? It says "Hey, we're a local company that happens to have a stock. Since you have enough money to afford Steelers tickets, you may want to invest." Naming a stadium is a huge deal for these companies. For example, the Pirates are getting a new field - PNC Park. This is a "slam dunk" for PNC bank. It puts their name out there for the general population, so that people will think "gee, this is a great thing for the community, I'm going to bank there." The fans like the fact that they ponied up the cash for their new park, and a small percentage will switch banks to support them, and finally, it says to investors that they are solid enough to be able to pay for all this, so they might be a good stock to buy long.
You are the exception. This became clear to me earlier this year. I work for a division of a company that has seen massive growth in the last year, except for the 1st quarter of this year. The marketeers in our company changed the advertising/sign up offer in January, and the sales dropped like a rock. Changed the offer back to the old one, and they soared again. Strange thing, the general population.
Our marketeers tell us that it costs US$150-200 per customer (Usually when they want us to push more product on the customers). We usually don't start making money until the customer has been around for 6 months or so. Anything that can deliver a targeted ad to a specific person or group is cheaper than broacasting a message to the world. Billboards are a good example of location based advertising. Anyone who drives I-95 to Flordia has had the excitement of reading all the South of the Boarder billboards (that used to be much better when they were mechanical, BTW). There's no reason to show them on I-81, so they don't bother to buy any.
When you can deliver an ad to the front of a business, that will mean something to the marketeers. At first, they'll get it all wrong, pushing ads to whoever happens by, thinking they are doing a good job, since it will increase foot traffic, but this will peak quickly, and many of those customers won't convert to long term customers (the goal of marketing). Then, your phone will do 1 of 2 things: either start broadcasting your preferences, or the marketeers will build huge relational databases to figure out what ads you *want* to see. Either way, you'll see many fewer ads after they get the bugs out, and they may even be for something you are interested in.
Having said that, it will be very difficult to adapt ads to the moving person. Most people are moving for a reason. Since it requires some higher level navagation on the part of the person moving, and use of energy to do it, you usually don't move unless you have a purpose for it. Think about it: Why would you just suddenly change your mind, unless that's exactly why you were moving in the first place (window shopping)?
Stomach to brain: "I'm empty. Energy low."
Brain: "What am I hungry for? I know -Pizza! I need a pizza place."
Given that dialog, what comes to mind? Wondering aimlessly until my phone sends me an alert that I'm in front of a pizza shop? No, because most of us have the ability to plan ahead, create a map in our minds (or check on a paper/whatever map), and navagate in the world. Just because an external device tells us that something exists doesn't mean we are going to change our internal schedule to accomidate.
This "solution" sounds more like something that will cater to impulse buyers only, meaning mostly people who haven't been in the world long enough to know the difference between advertising and reality, the value of a dollar, and planning ahead - you know, morons.
One thing I've noticed in the short life of the Internet and computer networking in general is that people don't seem to put up with "suit" behavior for very long. It is somewhat easy to show that the general Internet, as precieved by the average person, is already suffering from rot. When a new method of communications come along, it will either be absorbed by the mainstream (IE: web sites) or left to the fringe (IE: newsgroups). Anyone remember gopher servers? They were wonderful basic ways of navagating the various text and telnet resources of the Internet at that time. Unfortunatly, they have mostly been replaced and shut down now due to lack of use. But, the protocol is still out there, and if geeks or other folks see the web as getting too commercial or messy, they have an option. (and would work great on all those web phones)
Also, there's no reason why people can't form another grass roots network. With telecom prices falling daily, projects like the Linux router making a 486 into a decent, useful router, and telecom deregulation a reality, there is little reason to believe that it is not possible to build your own backbone (using wireless, perhaps?). Sure you may not be able to make any money at it, but from what I've seen of the.coms, I have my doubts that anyone will be showing profit anytime soon.
One last thing: Ham radio is dead (or, at least terminal). All the guys are over 50, and there are very few young people getting into the hobby. There is a large chunk of spectrum available, including very long distance bands, that specifically cannot pass commercial traffic. There is a real chance to recharge the hobby with getting higher speed, Internet-like networks working over these bands, but no one seems interested in doing the work (including myself, I guess). This is a golden oppertunity to create a network that can't be touched by the "suits," and push the state of the art as well. And getting your license is just about as easy as filling out a form, so it would be easy to get people signed up.
Most of the code enforcers are not really concerned about low voltage cable (your milage may vary). However, you should make sure you know what you are putting in those walls, and what else is in them. As others have pointed out, if you wnat to use a cold air return duct, you have to use plenum rated cable, lest the stuff give off toxic fumes when burning. It is best to avoid walls that have returns on them in general, just to keep everybody happy.
That being said, I have heard that Chicago has some of the strictest laws covering ANYTHING in construction. ALL cable in the wall has to be in a conduit, etc. It may seem like overkill, but I think they are looking out for fire since that cow knocked over the lantern a few years back.
That's usually the way it is done now, at least arround these parts. The contractor will usually put 2 cable and 2 phone. IF the homeowner realizes how dumb that is, they will let the H.O. get in on a weekend before the drywall goes in.
That's what I did for my sister's house. Phone, Cat 5, RG-6 cable to all the rooms, some with multiple outlets. Brought everything to a board in the basement, wired up all the lines to punchblocks, and they are ready for just about anything. Got them these really nice wallplates that can hold up to 6 outlets (just change the plate itself out, the old connections will carry over). Makes a real nice housewarming gift. Cost: about $250, mostly for the higher end wallplates (and the number of them).
Of course, her husband put about 120 electrical outlets in as well, so this place is ready for just about anything.
It is not just you. For a while my favorite activity in stereo shops was to walk up to the giant DVD display, wait for a sales person to walk up and tell me how great the picture is, and start pointing out all the artifacts.
I've worked in a production house in a former life, and most of the time we worked with a 3:1 or 2:1 compression ratio (with M-JPEG images). Any higher would just piss off the producers.
Depends on the compression. For example, 6:1 compression ususally looks good enough, like a good cable system. 3:1 looks like betacam (a professional tape format). DVC uses 4:1 compression, and with the right optical block on the camera, is just incredible. While I'd have to see the images this produces, most of the consumer digital video formats I've seen are nice, but don't make me drool. I have noticed that DVD players are getting better (as well as the encoders (human)), but I still see plenty of motion artifacts in things like trees. However, the signal to noise level is dramatically better than any other consumer format, save DVC
Remember, in the video world at least, digital may not be better. It is still a matter of bandwidth.
Actually, it uses MPEG-1 for the video as well. MPEG stands for Moving (no, not Motion) Picture Experts Group, a group of people who roughed out a video standard for computer video.
MP3 was just one audio standard developed to go along with MPEG 2. MPEG-1 and 2 are somewhat the same, but there are differences: MPEG-1 records 30 frames per second. MPEG-1.5 used the same compression format, but was adapted for 60 fields. MPEG-2 will do either, and happens to be the same transport for HDTV in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, this could end the whole thing, since who wants to pay to offer a service?
As far as a "personal server," which is what they are talking about, I'm finding more and more people who want new houses with data cable in mind (I work for a telecom company). They are putting it in for the simple reason that they don't know what is going to be happening, but they understand that there will be something down the road, and they need to become a part of it.
As far as need, well, what would you do with several gigs available to any multimedia terminal in the house? With an easy to configure/use interface to all your movies, music, and able to pull content from the Internet as well? Sounds like nerdvana now, but once people see this sort of thing, they want it.
Actually, they are still in use today. I heard a story on NPR a few weeks ago about a doctor/researcher who found receptors in the front of human nostrils that feed directly to the limbic system. He also found that people who have had them damaged, due to nose jobs and similar events have a far different view of people based on first impressions than folks who still have them in place. His theory is that this is a possible explaination for "love at first site."
The Print Preview button in Office was started this way, from what I've heard. The guy working on the print formating had to walk down the hall to see his work, and thought it was easier to just look at the printout on his screen.
The wording of this reminds me of the show "Blackmail." For those of you who don't know, it was a skit on Monty Python. They would show a film of someone in a potentially bad position, with a counter running. When the person sweats enough and calls in, they stop the tape. Great fun!
A friend of mine is a specialist in DB programming (Oracle mostly). He's pulling down $100,000 +bonus in Atlanta.
Compare this to the modern management structure: basically, do whatever we tell you. It doesn't matter if you should be doing what we hired you for, we want you to do this now. I have this happen to me all the time. I was hired to do a job with a description. However, it quickly became aparent to me that the "other duties as assigned" portion of the job description was much more important than the job I was hired for.
I used to think it was just the management of the company I work for, but after discussing this with some friends, it became clear that this happens everywhere.
The problem with this management style is that it promotes sloppy work. If I thought the job was going to be one thing (that I should like to do -why else would have I applied?), but it becomes something else (that I may not even have training to do), how good am I going to be?
I have also noticed the inverse is true: I work with people who are not doing what they are paid to do, only because they like that job more than their primary duties.
Of couse, there was also a very clear objective and process for meeting that objective.
Have to agree on this one. I always piss off the audio sales "professionals" in the local shop when discussing cables. I ask a few simple questions, such as "What tests have been done on cable X that show it is better than cable Y?" Normally, they start talking about the construction, the connectors, etc. None of them can point to any testing done to see if the cable is any better. The only "scientific" answers are ususally from people who bought them, read something in a newsgroup of crazy audio freaks about "skin effect" and high frequency loss (even though skin effect doesn't exist at audio frequencies - only RF).
So, don't look for prices on CO equipment to come down anytime soon. If anything, they will go up, due to the fact that consolidation in the telecom world is happening much faster than ever before.
That reminds me of an engineer at a Denver TV station. He said the engineers who ran the mobile trucks carried maps with the best path for selected areas. Many of them bounced signals off the skyscrapers downtown!
I always thought the microwave transmitters they use would make excelent data transmitters (at the time, VBI was the fastest game in town). You'd need a license, but I don't think they are very expensive.
Actually, GE sells stock with those ads. That's why you tend to see them on CNN and CNBC. If you are looking to invest, you may be watching those networks. CNBC is really interesting. If you want to sell stock, you appear on one of those shows that make the market look like a sporting event (squak box, etc). It has been shown that just a mention by one of those "experts" pushes the price up.
As for stadium sponsorships, it is the same thing. Why does Alcoa buy a sign in 3 Rivers Stadium in Pittsburgh? It says "Hey, we're a local company that happens to have a stock. Since you have enough money to afford Steelers tickets, you may want to invest." Naming a stadium is a huge deal for these companies. For example, the Pirates are getting a new field - PNC Park. This is a "slam dunk" for PNC bank. It puts their name out there for the general population, so that people will think "gee, this is a great thing for the community, I'm going to bank there." The fans like the fact that they ponied up the cash for their new park, and a small percentage will switch banks to support them, and finally, it says to investors that they are solid enough to be able to pay for all this, so they might be a good stock to buy long.
At least, that's the theory.
Our marketeers tell us that it costs US$150-200 per customer (Usually when they want us to push more product on the customers). We usually don't start making money until the customer has been around for 6 months or so. Anything that can deliver a targeted ad to a specific person or group is cheaper than broacasting a message to the world. Billboards are a good example of location based advertising. Anyone who drives I-95 to Flordia has had the excitement of reading all the South of the Boarder billboards (that used to be much better when they were mechanical, BTW). There's no reason to show them on I-81, so they don't bother to buy any.
When you can deliver an ad to the front of a business, that will mean something to the marketeers. At first, they'll get it all wrong, pushing ads to whoever happens by, thinking they are doing a good job, since it will increase foot traffic, but this will peak quickly, and many of those customers won't convert to long term customers (the goal of marketing). Then, your phone will do 1 of 2 things: either start broadcasting your preferences, or the marketeers will build huge relational databases to figure out what ads you *want* to see. Either way, you'll see many fewer ads after they get the bugs out, and they may even be for something you are interested in.
Having said that, it will be very difficult to adapt ads to the moving person. Most people are moving for a reason. Since it requires some higher level navagation on the part of the person moving, and use of energy to do it, you usually don't move unless you have a purpose for it. Think about it: Why would you just suddenly change your mind, unless that's exactly why you were moving in the first place (window shopping)?
Stomach to brain: "I'm empty. Energy low."
Brain: "What am I hungry for? I know -Pizza! I need a pizza place."
Given that dialog, what comes to mind? Wondering aimlessly until my phone sends me an alert that I'm in front of a pizza shop? No, because most of us have the ability to plan ahead, create a map in our minds (or check on a paper/whatever map), and navagate in the world. Just because an external device tells us that something exists doesn't mean we are going to change our internal schedule to accomidate.
This "solution" sounds more like something that will cater to impulse buyers only, meaning mostly people who haven't been in the world long enough to know the difference between advertising and reality, the value of a dollar, and planning ahead - you know, morons.
Also, there's no reason why people can't form another grass roots network. With telecom prices falling daily, projects like the Linux router making a 486 into a decent, useful router, and telecom deregulation a reality, there is little reason to believe that it is not possible to build your own backbone (using wireless, perhaps?). Sure you may not be able to make any money at it, but from what I've seen of the .coms, I have my doubts that anyone will be showing profit anytime soon.
One last thing: Ham radio is dead (or, at least terminal). All the guys are over 50, and there are very few young people getting into the hobby. There is a large chunk of spectrum available, including very long distance bands, that specifically cannot pass commercial traffic. There is a real chance to recharge the hobby with getting higher speed, Internet-like networks working over these bands, but no one seems interested in doing the work (including myself, I guess). This is a golden oppertunity to create a network that can't be touched by the "suits," and push the state of the art as well. And getting your license is just about as easy as filling out a form, so it would be easy to get people signed up.
He didn't happen to work for the phone company?
And the two people to open and close them.
That being said, I have heard that Chicago has some of the strictest laws covering ANYTHING in construction. ALL cable in the wall has to be in a conduit, etc. It may seem like overkill, but I think they are looking out for fire since that cow knocked over the lantern a few years back.
That's what I did for my sister's house. Phone, Cat 5, RG-6 cable to all the rooms, some with multiple outlets. Brought everything to a board in the basement, wired up all the lines to punchblocks, and they are ready for just about anything. Got them these really nice wallplates that can hold up to 6 outlets (just change the plate itself out, the old connections will carry over). Makes a real nice housewarming gift. Cost: about $250, mostly for the higher end wallplates (and the number of them).
Of course, her husband put about 120 electrical outlets in as well, so this place is ready for just about anything.
I've worked in a production house in a former life, and most of the time we worked with a 3:1 or 2:1 compression ratio (with M-JPEG images). Any higher would just piss off the producers.
Remember, in the video world at least, digital may not be better. It is still a matter of bandwidth.
MP3 was just one audio standard developed to go along with MPEG 2. MPEG-1 and 2 are somewhat the same, but there are differences: MPEG-1 records 30 frames per second. MPEG-1.5 used the same compression format, but was adapted for 60 fields. MPEG-2 will do either, and happens to be the same transport for HDTV in the US.