I am a hardcore free-market advocate so I have no problem with any supplier setting their prices however they want. The problem with the RIAA is that they use lawsuits and strong arm tactics to shut down cheaper means of distribution for the sole purpose of fleecing their customers. They are the middlemen in the chain and will do absolutely anything to keep it that way. They have a built in conflict of interest by being the producers (own the rights anyway) and distributors. ANY other business that is a producer would kill for a virtually free means of distribution.
You discredited your own example of Ferarri. If they are already selling every car they can build, then they wouldn't gain anything by lowering their prices. They would only lose money (and cause a shortage of Ferarris) by doing so. Oh well, just another bad car analogy I guess.
I realize that supply and demand are based on a curve. Digital distribution changes the way the curves are set though. The music industry wants to set the supply curve as if the costs of distribution are the same digitally as they have been traditionally. The demand curve flattens drastically because of the same reason. This is what scares them because they make their money from the distribution system currently in use.
The rest of your argument is crap. Your DVD player analogy is backwards. The files you buy from allofmp3(crackhead) are of better quality than you get from legit retailers like iTunes. You set your bitrate and format (no DRM). If a site sells files that are all goatse images, then that site will not be able to continue to stay in business. People will notice the scam and another site will get their business. This is not the fault of iTMS either. Do you think they would still be selling at $1 each if they hadn't been strongarmed by the big labels?
The credit card companies don't figure into this either. Any site that would allow a credit card transaction for a single download would be shooting itself in the foot. The solution would be a subscription/user account setup with defined amounts ($10,$20 purchases) in order to minimize the impact of the cost of using their services.
The music industry is pure and simply using monopolistic practices to fight off alternative distributions of the same product. There are very few valid reasons to ever fight against a free market on any good, digital or otherwise.
The goal of going against the RIAA is far from unified. Some people are against them because they want fair use of the music they have purchased. Others are against them because they are ripping off the artists. Others, like myself, believe that they are going against the free market and are using the courts to back up their manipulations. I don't think there is really anything wrong with any of the positions.
I don't necessarily agree with the term "pirated" either. "obtained from an unauthorized source" is probably more accurate. Every industry loses some profit to "theft". If the "piracy" problem is as bad as the music industry is saying, it tells me that they are determining the price for the market instead of the other way around, which is how it is supposed to work.
Buyers are willing to pay $1 for a song, so songs are worth $1.
Wrong! Some buyers are willing to pay $1 a song. The fact that people are still pirating and using grey-market sites like allofmp3.com shows this. Anyone that has taken Econ 101 knows that the supply and demand are not matching up here. The songs are worth whatever price point the market determines. The fact that all songs are priced the same regardless of consumer demand shows that the music industry is a cartel and is fixing prices. You can argue that people will always take free over pirating, but that is misleading too. There is a "value" to not running the risk of being sued. If the price matches the market demand, there will be fewer pirates. Fewer pirates means that the few left will be much easier to catch. Besides, if enough people quit sharing because they are now buying, the piracy market will become much less appealing because of fewer seeds/sources.
Wow. You might want to check on your binary to decimal converter. 10 in binary is 2 in decimal. If you are referring to the possible number of values in a 2-bit number you are still wrong (0-3 = 4 possible, not 3). Reminds me of the guy I saw on Who Wants to be a Millionaire that missed the $200 question of "How many legs does a tripod have?"
No, the GGP poster was just an idiot. I'd bet he's a 14 year old that doesn't know the difference between Britain and France thanks to our fantastic education system.
Yeah, I'd like to be paid more too, but why does an American deserve a better pay than an Indian or a Filippino?
We don't deserve any more than the market demands. The problem is that the cost of living is higher here. Also, it is a bit scary to work in a field that is so easily exported. Who knows, in ten years I might be able to find a better paying job at Wal Mart because my degree will be worthless.
I would also add that it is a very volatile market anyway. Sure there are jobs opening up right now. The problem is that a lot of companies look at software like it is somewhat of a luxury. If there is a hiccup in the economy, buying software is one of the first things to cut back on. I wouldn't recommend for my kids to get CS degrees only to have the market tank again like it did a few years ago. They would be better off getting something like a Civil or Mechanical degree because those jobs pay just as well and are way more stable.
I never said that the state of the society was good. You did prove my point though. One side of the aisle now backs social welfare programs, while the other touts corporate wellfare and national security. As soon as we traded our rights for security, we gave each side a carrot to keep us voting the party line. Either party can now win elections by simply spouting FUD about how the other side is going to take away that security. This system makes it damn near impossible to change to a third party because it is a bigger gamble.
Right on. There is no difference to me between the bogeyman of terrorism or the bogeyman of "hurting the poor". They are both scare tactics used to gain power. Politicians are the absolute lowest form of humanity. The sad part is that politics is a monopoly. We are forced to fund them through the IRS. We started down this slippery slope during the New Deal, when the "greater good" became the philosophy of the government. Whether you are giving up your rights in the name of big business or in the name of the underprivileged does not really make a difference. We gave up the right of personal responsibility a long time ago, which is the most important right of all.
I wouldn't say it is all crap. I have 250 dvd's. I looked into making a media server for them, but couldn't afford the storage space. I think there are a lot of geeks on slashdot that would kill to have a media server that could hold all of their dvds/blu-ray/hddvds along with 100+gigs of music + tons of porn + DVR that you never have to empty. I could see myself filling 100 terabytes easily (might take awhile) and none of it would be crap. It is convenience.
I think it would be awesome for developers to take the "We have this great controller, how can be build a great game around it(?)" approach. Half the posts on this thread are people bitching about developers rehashing old games with updated graphics. How is imagining the possible HSI a bad thing? This seems to me exactly what they should be doing to come up with something innovative. I don't think people are misquoting you. They are calling both of you shortsighted.
Your disgust with DRM is a great example of the best thing about it. You stopped using MiniDisc because it was so crippled. By crippling their products, these companies are lowering the value of them to the customers. This lowers demand for that product (especially since they still think they can charge full price for something less useful), hence mp3 is dominating the market because it has a higher value to the customer. If Sony hadn't handcuffed MiniDisc, it could be the new "Walkman" instead of the ipod. Not that Apple's DRM is the way to go.
I know quite a few people including myself that only play mp3s on their ipods. If Apple decided to only play their proprietary file format, the ipod would go the way of the Dodo. I hate DRM and love it at the same time. I love that companies are going with strict proprietary DRM because pissing off a lot of customers with it will kill it faster than us geeks on/. can by bitching about it.
Who pays for the content then? The bottom line is that commercials give you the ability to watch content for free. Without commercials you would ahve to have some mechanism for paying for each item of content
So you mean I am being ripped off? I have been getting billed about $100 a month for this free content you speak of. I wouldn't have a problem with this (forced ads) if it was actually free.
I just ordered the M3 perfect for mine so I don't need that crap. With this I can back up all of my DS games to a 4 gig CF card. I can also play videos, mp3s, images, etc. It also has built in emulators for NES and the supernin. I guess I'm not as 1337 as someone using a gamesave hack to run emulators and paying 200 bones for a harddrive. I also get to play Nintendo's in house games. Why is the PSP so much better again?
This entire thread is a good example of what is killing the environmental movement these days. As soon as someone from your cause associates with the enemy, they are an instant pariah. How do you ever expect anything to be fixed this way?
Seems to me like compromise is off the table. Why should big oil invest in making things better when no one will trust anyone they work with? On the other side, who from the enviro side wants to help big oil make things better if it will just cause them to be labeled a shill? You guys are shooting yourselves in the foot by taking the "our way or no way" route.
I suppose you could say they haven't changed much if you are talking gameplay mechanics, but I would argue that the gameplay experience has been very different in both of those series. Look at the differences between SMB1-SMW. You would have to be on crack to say that 2 is a rehash of the first.
The zelda series has done a very good job of changing it up. Every new generation seems to keep enough of the old to let you know that you are playing a zelda game, but changes enough to give a totally new experience. Zelda 1 and 2 were nothing alike whatsoever. LttP was an awesome game in the vein of the first. OoT and MM are similar to eachother (same engine), but totally different than all the others. WW was unique in it's own right. Nintendo keeps just enough of the older titles to let you know you are playing the same series, but the "mood" is completely different for each one. I will play zelda 20 when it comes out, if I live that long. They haven't exactly been spamming the market every year with an updated title.
That is their strong point. They take the time to make an absolutely rock solid game. I wish more software companies would take this route. I have a gamecube and a handfull of games (metroids, mario, zelda, smash bros, fzero, and RE4). In a lot of ways, I am happier with that setup than my PS2 and 30+ games because all of the gamecube titles (Nintendo's in house ones) are damn near perfect games. I have PS2 games that have gathered dust since the week after I bought them.
I will grant you that the gameboy color Zelda games have been very similar. That probably has more to do with Capcom than Nintendo though.
The catch is that by the time it is proven beyond any doubt, the worst predictions may have occurred. It seems foolish to do nothing until it's too late, especially because the risk is so great and the cost is so minor.
And violent movies and games cause murderers, while pornography causes rapists, and premarital sex causes broken homes and STDs. It can't be proven yet, but it would be foolish to wait for absolute proof before banning these things. After all, it wouldn't kill you to go without movies, games, porn, or sex now would it?
I hear this argument all the time that we need to change our way of life because the "predictions" might be true. It is absurd. Is global warming really that much different than any other religion? I will fight to the death anyone that tries to impose their will on my life without proof as to the necessity, NO MATTER WHAT THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES ARE.
It's a curious thing that global climate change posts on Slashdot have historically brought out the most virulent and impassioned commenters, 80% of them declaring it impossible, immaterial, and just plain not true.
It's funny to me how zealots on one side of an issue can only recognize zealots from the other side for their true colors. I guess they aren't virulent if they agree with you. That only makes them right. Right?
We're not all that bad. All of the insightful posts like yours on/. have finally convinced me to change my ways. I recently ordered one of these for my Mustang. I will get better gas mileage now! I recommend any SUV driver do the same. I am also going to remove the air conditioner from my car since it lowers my gas mileage as well.
Then I am going to lobby my polititian to pass a law that all cars have to have the air conditioner removed. After all, if I am being environmentally concious, all of you hybrid drivers should have to be too. I hope I am getting this forced ecofriendly legislation thing right. I am pretty new to the cause.
Maybe you should have checked at more than one store. There is this new thing called the internet that lets you find anything you could ever want.
I was going to buy a sony lcd hdtv until the rootkit fiasco. I have since decided to go with a Samsung. It is a bit more money, but I decided to put my money where my mouth is. I am also not going to buy a PS3. I am going to be hating life when GT5, GTA, and MGS4 come out, but having principles requires some sacrifice. The rootkit might not have been widely known, but they have lost tens of thousands of my dollars for the next few years. I bought a PS2 on launch and have 30+ games for it. I would have done the same for the PS3 before this too. I guess I will be giving my money to Nintendo for awhile. It didn't take much to convince most of my techie friends to do the same.
My point is that not very many people are holding Sony accountable, but the ones like myself that are, are costing them a ton of money.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a hardcore free-market advocate so I have no problem with any supplier setting their prices however they want. The problem with the RIAA is that they use lawsuits and strong arm tactics to shut down cheaper means of distribution for the sole purpose of fleecing their customers. They are the middlemen in the chain and will do absolutely anything to keep it that way. They have a built in conflict of interest by being the producers (own the rights anyway) and distributors. ANY other business that is a producer would kill for a virtually free means of distribution.
You discredited your own example of Ferarri. If they are already selling every car they can build, then they wouldn't gain anything by lowering their prices. They would only lose money (and cause a shortage of Ferarris) by doing so. Oh well, just another bad car analogy I guess.
I realize that supply and demand are based on a curve. Digital distribution changes the way the curves are set though. The music industry wants to set the supply curve as if the costs of distribution are the same digitally as they have been traditionally. The demand curve flattens drastically because of the same reason. This is what scares them because they make their money from the distribution system currently in use.
The rest of your argument is crap. Your DVD player analogy is backwards. The files you buy from allofmp3(crackhead) are of better quality than you get from legit retailers like iTunes. You set your bitrate and format (no DRM). If a site sells files that are all goatse images, then that site will not be able to continue to stay in business. People will notice the scam and another site will get their business. This is not the fault of iTMS either. Do you think they would still be selling at $1 each if they hadn't been strongarmed by the big labels?The credit card companies don't figure into this either. Any site that would allow a credit card transaction for a single download would be shooting itself in the foot. The solution would be a subscription/user account setup with defined amounts ($10,$20 purchases) in order to minimize the impact of the cost of using their services.
The music industry is pure and simply using monopolistic practices to fight off alternative distributions of the same product. There are very few valid reasons to ever fight against a free market on any good, digital or otherwise.IANAE but I'm not an idiot either
The goal of going against the RIAA is far from unified. Some people are against them because they want fair use of the music they have purchased. Others are against them because they are ripping off the artists. Others, like myself, believe that they are going against the free market and are using the courts to back up their manipulations. I don't think there is really anything wrong with any of the positions.
I don't necessarily agree with the term "pirated" either. "obtained from an unauthorized source" is probably more accurate. Every industry loses some profit to "theft". If the "piracy" problem is as bad as the music industry is saying, it tells me that they are determining the price for the market instead of the other way around, which is how it is supposed to work.
Wrong! Some buyers are willing to pay $1 a song. The fact that people are still pirating and using grey-market sites like allofmp3.com shows this. Anyone that has taken Econ 101 knows that the supply and demand are not matching up here. The songs are worth whatever price point the market determines. The fact that all songs are priced the same regardless of consumer demand shows that the music industry is a cartel and is fixing prices. You can argue that people will always take free over pirating, but that is misleading too. There is a "value" to not running the risk of being sued. If the price matches the market demand, there will be fewer pirates. Fewer pirates means that the few left will be much easier to catch. Besides, if enough people quit sharing because they are now buying, the piracy market will become much less appealing because of fewer seeds/sources.
Wow. You might want to check on your binary to decimal converter. 10 in binary is 2 in decimal. If you are referring to the possible number of values in a 2-bit number you are still wrong (0-3 = 4 possible, not 3). Reminds me of the guy I saw on Who Wants to be a Millionaire that missed the $200 question of "How many legs does a tripod have?"
No, the GGP poster was just an idiot. I'd bet he's a 14 year old that doesn't know the difference between Britain and France thanks to our fantastic education system.
Yeah, I'd like to be paid more too, but why does an American deserve a better pay than an Indian or a Filippino? We don't deserve any more than the market demands. The problem is that the cost of living is higher here. Also, it is a bit scary to work in a field that is so easily exported. Who knows, in ten years I might be able to find a better paying job at Wal Mart because my degree will be worthless.
I would also add that it is a very volatile market anyway. Sure there are jobs opening up right now. The problem is that a lot of companies look at software like it is somewhat of a luxury. If there is a hiccup in the economy, buying software is one of the first things to cut back on. I wouldn't recommend for my kids to get CS degrees only to have the market tank again like it did a few years ago. They would be better off getting something like a Civil or Mechanical degree because those jobs pay just as well and are way more stable.
I never said that the state of the society was good. You did prove my point though. One side of the aisle now backs social welfare programs, while the other touts corporate wellfare and national security. As soon as we traded our rights for security, we gave each side a carrot to keep us voting the party line. Either party can now win elections by simply spouting FUD about how the other side is going to take away that security. This system makes it damn near impossible to change to a third party because it is a bigger gamble.
Right on. There is no difference to me between the bogeyman of terrorism or the bogeyman of "hurting the poor". They are both scare tactics used to gain power. Politicians are the absolute lowest form of humanity. The sad part is that politics is a monopoly. We are forced to fund them through the IRS. We started down this slippery slope during the New Deal, when the "greater good" became the philosophy of the government. Whether you are giving up your rights in the name of big business or in the name of the underprivileged does not really make a difference. We gave up the right of personal responsibility a long time ago, which is the most important right of all.
Best... Post... Ever!
Paying $250 to see Madonna is a self imposed tax on the stupid.
I wouldn't say it is all crap. I have 250 dvd's. I looked into making a media server for them, but couldn't afford the storage space. I think there are a lot of geeks on slashdot that would kill to have a media server that could hold all of their dvds/blu-ray/hddvds along with 100+gigs of music + tons of porn + DVR that you never have to empty. I could see myself filling 100 terabytes easily (might take awhile) and none of it would be crap. It is convenience.
I think it would be awesome for developers to take the "We have this great controller, how can be build a great game around it(?)" approach. Half the posts on this thread are people bitching about developers rehashing old games with updated graphics. How is imagining the possible HSI a bad thing? This seems to me exactly what they should be doing to come up with something innovative. I don't think people are misquoting you. They are calling both of you shortsighted.
Your disgust with DRM is a great example of the best thing about it. You stopped using MiniDisc because it was so crippled. By crippling their products, these companies are lowering the value of them to the customers. This lowers demand for that product (especially since they still think they can charge full price for something less useful), hence mp3 is dominating the market because it has a higher value to the customer. If Sony hadn't handcuffed MiniDisc, it could be the new "Walkman" instead of the ipod. Not that Apple's DRM is the way to go.
I know quite a few people including myself that only play mp3s on their ipods. If Apple decided to only play their proprietary file format, the ipod would go the way of the Dodo. I hate DRM and love it at the same time. I love that companies are going with strict proprietary DRM because pissing off a lot of customers with it will kill it faster than us geeks onWho pays for the content then? The bottom line is that commercials give you the ability to watch content for free. Without commercials you would ahve to have some mechanism for paying for each item of content So you mean I am being ripped off? I have been getting billed about $100 a month for this free content you speak of. I wouldn't have a problem with this (forced ads) if it was actually free.
I just ordered the M3 perfect for mine so I don't need that crap. With this I can back up all of my DS games to a 4 gig CF card. I can also play videos, mp3s, images, etc. It also has built in emulators for NES and the supernin. I guess I'm not as 1337 as someone using a gamesave hack to run emulators and paying 200 bones for a harddrive. I also get to play Nintendo's in house games. Why is the PSP so much better again?
This entire thread is a good example of what is killing the environmental movement these days. As soon as someone from your cause associates with the enemy, they are an instant pariah. How do you ever expect anything to be fixed this way?
Seems to me like compromise is off the table. Why should big oil invest in making things better when no one will trust anyone they work with? On the other side, who from the enviro side wants to help big oil make things better if it will just cause them to be labeled a shill? You guys are shooting yourselves in the foot by taking the "our way or no way" route.
I suppose you could say they haven't changed much if you are talking gameplay mechanics, but I would argue that the gameplay experience has been very different in both of those series. Look at the differences between SMB1-SMW. You would have to be on crack to say that 2 is a rehash of the first.
The zelda series has done a very good job of changing it up. Every new generation seems to keep enough of the old to let you know that you are playing a zelda game, but changes enough to give a totally new experience. Zelda 1 and 2 were nothing alike whatsoever. LttP was an awesome game in the vein of the first. OoT and MM are similar to eachother (same engine), but totally different than all the others. WW was unique in it's own right. Nintendo keeps just enough of the older titles to let you know you are playing the same series, but the "mood" is completely different for each one. I will play zelda 20 when it comes out, if I live that long. They haven't exactly been spamming the market every year with an updated title.
That is their strong point. They take the time to make an absolutely rock solid game. I wish more software companies would take this route. I have a gamecube and a handfull of games (metroids, mario, zelda, smash bros, fzero, and RE4). In a lot of ways, I am happier with that setup than my PS2 and 30+ games because all of the gamecube titles (Nintendo's in house ones) are damn near perfect games. I have PS2 games that have gathered dust since the week after I bought them.
I will grant you that the gameboy color Zelda games have been very similar. That probably has more to do with Capcom than Nintendo though.Can't... breathe... Has anyone else noticed how bad the smug has been on slashdot the past few days?
Because he was comparing countries with growing economies (our actual competitors), unlike say... most of Europe.
And violent movies and games cause murderers, while pornography causes rapists, and premarital sex causes broken homes and STDs. It can't be proven yet, but it would be foolish to wait for absolute proof before banning these things. After all, it wouldn't kill you to go without movies, games, porn, or sex now would it?
I hear this argument all the time that we need to change our way of life because the "predictions" might be true. It is absurd. Is global warming really that much different than any other religion? I will fight to the death anyone that tries to impose their will on my life without proof as to the necessity, NO MATTER WHAT THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES ARE.
It's funny to me how zealots on one side of an issue can only recognize zealots from the other side for their true colors. I guess they aren't virulent if they agree with you. That only makes them right. Right?
We're not all that bad. All of the insightful posts like yours on /. have finally convinced me to change my ways. I recently ordered one of these for my Mustang. I will get better gas mileage now! I recommend any SUV driver do the same. I am also going to remove the air conditioner from my car since it lowers my gas mileage as well.
Then I am going to lobby my polititian to pass a law that all cars have to have the air conditioner removed. After all, if I am being environmentally concious, all of you hybrid drivers should have to be too. I hope I am getting this forced ecofriendly legislation thing right. I am pretty new to the cause.
Maybe you should have checked at more than one store. There is this new thing called the internet that lets you find anything you could ever want.
I was going to buy a sony lcd hdtv until the rootkit fiasco. I have since decided to go with a Samsung. It is a bit more money, but I decided to put my money where my mouth is. I am also not going to buy a PS3. I am going to be hating life when GT5, GTA, and MGS4 come out, but having principles requires some sacrifice. The rootkit might not have been widely known, but they have lost tens of thousands of my dollars for the next few years. I bought a PS2 on launch and have 30+ games for it. I would have done the same for the PS3 before this too. I guess I will be giving my money to Nintendo for awhile. It didn't take much to convince most of my techie friends to do the same.
My point is that not very many people are holding Sony accountable, but the ones like myself that are, are costing them a ton of money.