That's why I've been turning to the BBC (and the CBC) more often. Put whatever hate you want on socialism, but it really does improve on capitalism when it comes to allowing media to do an effective job at funding news.
This seem to be to be oversimplyfying complex issues. Saying that BBC is doing more reasearch, or is more objective, than other unamed news sources because of Socialism Vs Capitalism sounds ludicrus. Look at Cuba, or certain South American nations, and tell me how they "allow the media to do an effective job".
Of course personally I am from Norway which could be said to be far more socialistic than even Britain, still most people in Norway wouldn't call themselves socialists and they would take serious exception if you called them, or this country, socialist.
Perhaps the strongest argument here is that more, or more enforced, regulation regarding reporting of News (or more specifically misleading or liying in News) is taking place in Britain, and other European countries, and that therefore it is slightly harder for Media in those countries to post pure bullshit (though they can still mislead or write ignorant stupid articles).
Say what you like about socialism or capitalism, but most European states seems content to pick what they like from both those -isms, and several others, and making their own sort of Government as they go along.
Re:What do you get combining Apple + gaming compan
on
Apple Eyeing EA?
·
· Score: 1
They don't want to be a 'me-too!' company by jumping into a market with a shiny white console when the console market is already saturated between the Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii. Apple conquered a new market with the iPod and is a serious contender in the emerging smartphone market. Apple will continue to tackle emerging technologies, not established technologies like game consoles.
IF Apple is, or is thinking off, buying EA, in order to push for broader Mac support in forth coming video games; then I don't think it would be to "become a console". PCs (and by this I mean Computes Running Windows basically) are used for a lot of different tasks, many of them the same tasks done on Macs, however a computer have a large share of games made available as well (some also works on Macs; but for the most part Windows based clients are prioritized more than Macs). What I imagine Apple would want was for games to have full Mac support along the same lines as their Windows releases. This is wouldn't make a Mac a competitor to Consoles, but to gain equal footing with Microsoft when it comes to games running on a computer platform. Not to mention that the added benefit, IF the Windows/DirectX dominance of Computer Games is broken; it could help push for broader Linux support as well. In short, establishing standards for computer game code that cave broader support to different operating systems; could allow consumers in the distant future to eventually enjoy video games on the computer client, console, terminal, brain interface; of their choice.
Now you know how PS3 owners felt about Bioshock, Fallout 3 DLC, etc.
Or in regards to Fallout 3; those of us who bought the game via Steam and then wanted to buy the DLC as it arrived.
For those that don't know Microsoft has retained exclusive distribution rights for Fallout DLC; which means that there are no DLC for PS3 what so ever (from what I have read and heard) and if want to buy the DLC for the PC version you have to do it through Games For Windows Live. Something that means (if you bought it the game through Steam) that you have to install the GFWL client stuff and mess around with that.
My personal experience was that first the "Live" button inside the Fallout menus would send me to the xBox Marketplace and not give me ANY information on how to go to the PC Marketplace; eventually I start the client through Windows and get the correct list of software; I search through and find the Fallout DLC; but when I press the "buy Microsoft Points" button (yeah you can't pay with money directly for reasons that appear to be entirely motivated by the desire to suck more out of their customers) it sends me to my Hotmail inbox in another browser window (happend over and over). So you know what? I decide that the DLC is TOO much trouble. I wanted to play through Fallout 3 again with the DLC, but it just turns out of be more aggravation than it is worth; and because I now have a faulty GFWL program installed my Fallout 3 version now refuses to Save games until the GFWL servers start working properly and authenticates my KEY (and remember this is my legal version running through Steam that GFWL decided to "lock").
In short, hurray for greed motivated distribution that directly hinders or counter a potential customers desire to enjoy a product.
I was under the impression that this was primarily about the assignment of IP addresses and assignment of domain names. Not about what can or can't be posted on those adresses or domains.
That being said I hope USA take total and restrictive control over ICANN; simply because I want, and hope, that it will force Europe (and basically all the other nations of the world that want to use a type of internet like service) to think outside the box and find ways to adapt and marginalise ICANN and the current way of organizing things. To be more specific I believe the best way for something to remain free is to ensure that it is decentralised and broken into so many pieces it will be absolutely impossible for one organisation or nation to maintain oversight or control. This is because I trust the US Government as much as I trust most of the nations of the world; i.e. Not Very.
A lot of people have made the observation that it's basically impossible to raise the capital and perform the beta testing required to dethrone WoW.
Now Blizzard might have more capital than most; but I wouldn't underestimate the resources of Bioware and their partnership with LucasArts. Given speculating about how good Star wars - Old Republic will be is pure conjecture at this point; though if anyone is going to "dethrone" wow in any near future I reckon Bioware is as likely a candidate as any.
I guess a persons viewpoint on corporate taxations and regulation is based in part on perception, part on hearsay and part on belief. Should a corporation have the same rights as a citizen? Should the government favour corporations over individuals? And does low corporate tax mean a higher quality of life for citizens?
These are, in my view, important questions that need to be debated, research and argued for and against with reason, reflection and as far as possible with a comprehensive and broad study of the many many factors involved. Hopefully one would eventually end up with a policy based in reason that reflected practical reality and not dogmatic ideology.
Usually when the government lowers taxes they see an increase in tax revenue because of increased spending since taxes are lower.
Hard for me to evaluate this but I would be surprised if it was quite that simple. The economy is complex and there are many factors involved in levels that might not be immediately obvious. Of course if you provided links and information about in which period you are referring to we could perhaps evaluate further and speculate to whether or not the lowered tax was the ONLY contributing factor to increased revenue.
The goal, again in my view, should be to arrive at a tax, budget and economic policy that allowed the state to do all the things that are necessary (fire, police, roads, and other institutions depending on what you believe the Government should, or could, run or regulate); while providing the greatest amount of freedom for the individual. Though in this particular case I see only a Head of State trying to push for enforcing the laws and regulations that are already present. And to make it harder to avoid paying the existing taxes by finding loopholes. Debating about whether or not those taxes and regulations are fair is another issue entirely; but one, as I state above, is important no doubt about that. However anyone trying to excuse their criminal or unethical behaviour by saying "The law isn't fair!" can join the rest of the prison population; or actually try to use the democratic means available to argue for changing those laws. In this case "the corporations in question" are just a whining bunch of cry babies who believe they should be allowed to do what they wish disregarding what the laws of their own nation says.
From the First of January 2009 all Norwegian Government or Education related sites and services are using the "Open Formats" ODF, PDF and HTML. Also all schools and government institutions are required to accept documents submitted in ODF.
- Norway has so far lacked a policy regarding the area of software. This have now changed. This Cabinet has decided that IT-development in the public sector shall be based upon Open Standards. In the future we will not accept that State activities locks users of public information to Locked Formats. - Heidi Grande Røys (Minister of Government Administration and Reform).
Microsoft might play their games to hinder development as much as they can, but at least in this country the turn towards Open Standards seems inevitable.
While there are definitive flaws in implementation the general idea behind most courses in Norway is that the student shouldn't memorize a lot of trivia; but rather be able to use information productively regarding the subject. Showing a deeper understanding of the subject and the tools necessary to work within the field of study weights heavier than simply parroting of facts and figures.
Of course this is far harder for a teacher to evaluate than a simple multiple choice exam (I never had a single multiple choice test during my twelve years of basic education and three years at university). Therefore any student with the capacity to write coherently on the subject of their studies will at the very least be able to get a passing grade. Of course actually excelling requires the student to not only write coherently but to show real capacity for reason, and being able to correctly use and present in a way that shows their firm grasp of the matter at hand. The problem at the moment, at least with some courses, is that a student can read through the material and then simply float through the system by not being an idiot; i.e. getting passing grades by simply showing up and not write stuff that is utterly garbage.
I would agree that the implementation needs to motivate students to study harder and learn more, and to reward them when they do. Though there is a phrase that is the main doctrine for High School and above which is; Responsible for Your Own Education. Which means that students themselves are responsible for actively pursuing the knowledge required to improve in their field of study. Unfortunately statistics and psychology indicates that things aren't quite that simple. Especially when a student beginning high school is about sixteen and probably royally feed up with going to school as it is.
iTunes Norge have a severely limited selection of movies and series. In part because of the Norwegian Movie and Music industry, and in part because they refuse to follow Norwegian Law. Which is also why Apple/iTunes have threatened to boycott Norway several times. So iTunes is not a viable option since it does not provide what I want, and even if it did I couldn't be certain I would be able to access what I had purchased a few months, or years, down the line.
Personally I would be happy to pay Discovery money to be able to download or stream various programs they provide through the internet. But I will never pay for a lot of cable channels I am never going to use, or that requires me to buy recording devices to be able to watch said programming when I got the time and inclination to do so.
I guess the problem is that majority of programming suck, or at least that the broad scope of programs available through a cable package is so diverse that many only enjoy a small handful while the rest that falls outside the individual field of interest is uninteresting.
The tactic employed is to bundle "high quality" channels with "low quality" channels to ensure that if you want to buy the thing you are interesting you also have to buy a lot of crap that you don't are about. Selling individual channels, or smaller bundles, would mean you could probably ensure that what channels you get are those you actually want to watch; but it would also mean that a lot of marginal shows and channels would go out of business.
Of course personally I believe that this is pretty much inevitable and that shows and programming enjoyed by a smaller minority will have to find other ways to reach their targeted audience (like say the Internet). And it probably wont stop there either. In fact I would go so far as to say that over the next two decades the traditional way (in so far as something as new as cable can be said to have a tradition) of watching TV will change in many different ways. Using myself as an example I don't watch TV. Not because there aren't shows I would be interested in, but because I simply can not tailor my day around a programming schedule (nor am I inclined to buy a cable package and a Tivo like device). For me the only option when it comes to watching shows is getting them online (and I am sad to say the options for doing that legal is severely limited in my Country); so for the most part I just have to do without until reality catches up with technology and gives me options suited to my lifestyle.
So, yes, right now Youtube costs money, but that is called investment. It is what shareholders were supposed to be for.
This particular investment is costing Google (and its shareholders) about 2 million dollars a day; subtract revenue from that number and they end up spending about 1.65 million a day. Google Losing up to $1.65M a Day on YouTube. Now roughly calculated that means that Google will lose about 600 million dollars this year keeping YouTube alive. If I was an investor in Google I would be getting exceptionally sceptical to this particular investment.
Unless bandwidth becomes drastically cheaper in the immediate future Google will have to find a way to at least break even; if not they'll have to get rid of YouTube since despite any non-tangible reward they might gain from ownership is by far outweighed by the very tangible drain on the company's resources. Google might have more money than you can shake a big stick at; but 600 millions is not insignificant.
The bigger question is; When we DO get 3D porn will it make you believe, and create the memory, that you've had actually sex? And if it does; hi to you population decrease.
...but seems to be OK with the fact that the new movie, from all they've shown us so far, is a mindless sex and violence movie.
Oh my you just peaked my interest. Never been much of a Star Trek fanboy (though I have seen most of the movies, I am nerd after all), was pretty ambivalent about the new movie but I am always up for some sex and violence!
This might be slightly unrelated. But the Norwegian Government decided in 2006 that full broadband coverage should be a goal for the near future. Norway is a long coastal country with some people living in places that are way into the middle of some mountainside; and villages and towns with low population here and there. However eventually it was decided that Internet was pretty much required for modern live, and in fact; was more essential the more in the middle of nowhere you live.
The immediate goal was 98% coverage by the end of 2007 and 100% as soon as it would be possible to get there. At the moment the coverage is at about 99.5% with an estimate that they will reach practically 100% by the end of the year. To achieve this goal they have so far given local governments 850 million NOK to build and improve infrastructure; and ISP and local commercial interests have contributed to; in total about 1.5 billion NOK has been spent.
If you can read Norwegian www.regjeringen.no has more info. Here is a quote from 2007 by the then Norwegian Minister of Petroleum and Energy; Åslaug Haga The quote is in Norwegian so I have tried to translate as best I can.
Creation of a broadband infrastructure is an important part of our [the party coalition in Government] goals for the districts. We can not accept that anyone in this country becomes losers in the digital evolution. Broadband also gives opportunities for economic development and growth. To ensure full broadband coverage the Government has decided to stimulate faster expansions of the infrastructure; especially in those areas were it isn't commercially profitable to do so.
Think of this as you will; but despite my disagreements with some of the things said and done by various ministers and the government in general; at one point I agree. Full broadband coverage is essential to modern life. It is a means of communication, of gaining information about what is happening, of paying your bills if the nearest bank is a day away, or an important tool for education or self-education. And much much more. Providing full coverage with affordable broadband should be a goal for any country that wish to ensure their citizens grain a high degree of familiarity with technology; and wish to remain competitive in the global market.
otherwise one probably has to assume that the proceedings touch 'national security'.
Actually it is because of all the subliminal messages the Government (read: our alien overlords that run the world) place in the music. Which is why I only listen to white noise from my old analogue radio! Cthulhu fhtagn!
"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."
If a nootropic came to exist that made you a whole bunch smarter, and a whole bunch less creative with no other obvious side effects - I think you can kiss creativity goodbye.
"Smarter" is a fairly vague term. Smarter how? Some activities (work related or not) require creativity for you to be effective. Not counting the obvious ones (like design, music, painting, architecture etc) I would say that a scientist or detective without creativity could be hyper intelligent and still not be able to produce a usable result; depending of course on what the desired result is. One could argue that making certain connections requires creativity.
That being said I find this area of research to be fascinating; even if it does at times make me a just a bit apprehensive.
The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It was caused by an unusually virulent and deadly Influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1. Historical and epidemiologic data are inadequate to identify the geographic origin of the virus.[1] Most of its victims were healthy young adults, in contrast to most influenza outbreaks which predominantly affect juvenile, elderly, or otherwise weakened patients. The pandemic lasted from March 1918 to June 1920, spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. It is estimated that anywhere from 20 to 100 million people were killed worldwide.
While we, at least industrialized countries, are far better equipped to deal with another major outbreak than in 1918; I feel taking precautions would be the rational thing to do.
But I wonder how many people who are criticizing Time Warner over this really understand what they're arguing in favor of. They're arguing in favor of an economic system that is designed to be anti-competitive and to provide services for less than a private company ever could.
This is conjecture. Just because people are critical of the way TWC have handled this case, and just because they took matters into their own hand to find one solution (temporary or permanent}; does not mean that it have to lead to the implementation of a socialistic economic variation. Even if you accept that the solution they adopted here is moving into one of the fundamental concepts upon which the numerous variations of socialistic philosophy is based.
I would urge you, and others, to keep in mind that reality is not easily put into one category or another. Socialistic and Capitalistic concepts and ideas are not all Either Or; one or the other. What matters is practical implementation of ideas; something that makes no distinction between the various ideologies behind the implementations chosen or attempted.
While they people in question here might have taken the path the did because of perceived flaws in the system in place; does not mean anyone is advocating a total replacement of the system; or that following up on what they did with Greenlight will necessarily lead to the total implementation of a variant of a socialistic economical model; or that all socialistic economical models are hostile to all sorts of competition.
Of course on the last point I will agree; very few seem to understand this; or that reality is not easily divided into ideological camps. Few things are black and white, one or the other. Our society and government(s) are what we make them, shaped by our ideas and actions.
If the companies delivering internet doesn't deliver the speed or quality desired by the citizens of a region or city; then I see absolutely no problem with the people taking matters into their own hands. In fact I would call it democracy in practice. TWC trying to push legislation should be ruled as anti-competitive behaviour and they should be heavily fined.
If anything should be done it might be the privatization of the newly created service provider. The city should retain a minority controlling share, impose oversight and fair rules; and then let the company exist as a competitor. If TWC want to gain back their customers they should perhaps try to actually provide the services people want, at fair prices and with good service. Instead of using resources that could be better spent trying to hinder and punish citizens who's example should be honoured, respected and emulated.
Apparently the Extended version will run up to an hour longer than the Theatrical cut.
While the Watchmen movie wasn't perfect, and while it might not have earned as much as they wanted it to; I fully expect the DvD version of the movie to sell very very well.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I've been turning to the BBC (and the CBC) more often. Put whatever hate you want on socialism, but it really does improve on capitalism when it comes to allowing media to do an effective job at funding news.
This seem to be to be oversimplyfying complex issues. Saying that BBC is doing more reasearch, or is more objective, than other unamed news sources because of Socialism Vs Capitalism sounds ludicrus. Look at Cuba, or certain South American nations, and tell me how they "allow the media to do an effective job".
Of course personally I am from Norway which could be said to be far more socialistic than even Britain, still most people in Norway wouldn't call themselves socialists and they would take serious exception if you called them, or this country, socialist.
Perhaps the strongest argument here is that more, or more enforced, regulation regarding reporting of News (or more specifically misleading or liying in News) is taking place in Britain, and other European countries, and that therefore it is slightly harder for Media in those countries to post pure bullshit (though they can still mislead or write ignorant stupid articles).
Say what you like about socialism or capitalism, but most European states seems content to pick what they like from both those -isms, and several others, and making their own sort of Government as they go along.
I for one welcome our new datasorting overlords!
They don't want to be a 'me-too!' company by jumping into a market with a shiny white console when the console market is already saturated between the Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii. Apple conquered a new market with the iPod and is a serious contender in the emerging smartphone market. Apple will continue to tackle emerging technologies, not established technologies like game consoles.
IF Apple is, or is thinking off, buying EA, in order to push for broader Mac support in forth coming video games; then I don't think it would be to "become a console". PCs (and by this I mean Computes Running Windows basically) are used for a lot of different tasks, many of them the same tasks done on Macs, however a computer have a large share of games made available as well (some also works on Macs; but for the most part Windows based clients are prioritized more than Macs). What I imagine Apple would want was for games to have full Mac support along the same lines as their Windows releases. This is wouldn't make a Mac a competitor to Consoles, but to gain equal footing with Microsoft when it comes to games running on a computer platform. Not to mention that the added benefit, IF the Windows/DirectX dominance of Computer Games is broken; it could help push for broader Linux support as well. In short, establishing standards for computer game code that cave broader support to different operating systems; could allow consumers in the distant future to eventually enjoy video games on the computer client, console, terminal, brain interface; of their choice.
Now you know how PS3 owners felt about Bioshock, Fallout 3 DLC, etc.
Or in regards to Fallout 3; those of us who bought the game via Steam and then wanted to buy the DLC as it arrived.
For those that don't know Microsoft has retained exclusive distribution rights for Fallout DLC; which means that there are no DLC for PS3 what so ever (from what I have read and heard) and if want to buy the DLC for the PC version you have to do it through Games For Windows Live. Something that means (if you bought it the game through Steam) that you have to install the GFWL client stuff and mess around with that.
My personal experience was that first the "Live" button inside the Fallout menus would send me to the xBox Marketplace and not give me ANY information on how to go to the PC Marketplace; eventually I start the client through Windows and get the correct list of software; I search through and find the Fallout DLC; but when I press the "buy Microsoft Points" button (yeah you can't pay with money directly for reasons that appear to be entirely motivated by the desire to suck more out of their customers) it sends me to my Hotmail inbox in another browser window (happend over and over). So you know what? I decide that the DLC is TOO much trouble. I wanted to play through Fallout 3 again with the DLC, but it just turns out of be more aggravation than it is worth; and because I now have a faulty GFWL program installed my Fallout 3 version now refuses to Save games until the GFWL servers start working properly and authenticates my KEY (and remember this is my legal version running through Steam that GFWL decided to "lock").
In short, hurray for greed motivated distribution that directly hinders or counter a potential customers desire to enjoy a product.
I was under the impression that this was primarily about the assignment of IP addresses and assignment of domain names. Not about what can or can't be posted on those adresses or domains.
That being said I hope USA take total and restrictive control over ICANN; simply because I want, and hope, that it will force Europe (and basically all the other nations of the world that want to use a type of internet like service) to think outside the box and find ways to adapt and marginalise ICANN and the current way of organizing things. To be more specific I believe the best way for something to remain free is to ensure that it is decentralised and broken into so many pieces it will be absolutely impossible for one organisation or nation to maintain oversight or control. This is because I trust the US Government as much as I trust most of the nations of the world; i.e. Not Very.
A lot of people have made the observation that it's basically impossible to raise the capital and perform the beta testing required to dethrone WoW.
Now Blizzard might have more capital than most; but I wouldn't underestimate the resources of Bioware and their partnership with LucasArts. Given speculating about how good Star wars - Old Republic will be is pure conjecture at this point; though if anyone is going to "dethrone" wow in any near future I reckon Bioware is as likely a candidate as any.
These are, in my view, important questions that need to be debated, research and argued for and against with reason, reflection and as far as possible with a comprehensive and broad study of the many many factors involved. Hopefully one would eventually end up with a policy based in reason that reflected practical reality and not dogmatic ideology.
Usually when the government lowers taxes they see an increase in tax revenue because of increased spending since taxes are lower.
Hard for me to evaluate this but I would be surprised if it was quite that simple. The economy is complex and there are many factors involved in levels that might not be immediately obvious. Of course if you provided links and information about in which period you are referring to we could perhaps evaluate further and speculate to whether or not the lowered tax was the ONLY contributing factor to increased revenue.
The goal, again in my view, should be to arrive at a tax, budget and economic policy that allowed the state to do all the things that are necessary (fire, police, roads, and other institutions depending on what you believe the Government should, or could, run or regulate); while providing the greatest amount of freedom for the individual. Though in this particular case I see only a Head of State trying to push for enforcing the laws and regulations that are already present. And to make it harder to avoid paying the existing taxes by finding loopholes. Debating about whether or not those taxes and regulations are fair is another issue entirely; but one, as I state above, is important no doubt about that. However anyone trying to excuse their criminal or unethical behaviour by saying "The law isn't fair!" can join the rest of the prison population; or actually try to use the democratic means available to argue for changing those laws. In this case "the corporations in question" are just a whining bunch of cry babies who believe they should be allowed to do what they wish disregarding what the laws of their own nation says.
Åpne dokumentstandarder blir obligatoriske i staten.
My rough translation from Norwegian:
- Norway has so far lacked a policy regarding the area of software. This have now changed. This Cabinet has decided that IT-development in the public sector shall be based upon Open Standards. In the future we will not accept that State activities locks users of public information to Locked Formats. - Heidi Grande Røys (Minister of Government Administration and Reform).
Microsoft might play their games to hinder development as much as they can, but at least in this country the turn towards Open Standards seems inevitable.
While there are definitive flaws in implementation the general idea behind most courses in Norway is that the student shouldn't memorize a lot of trivia; but rather be able to use information productively regarding the subject. Showing a deeper understanding of the subject and the tools necessary to work within the field of study weights heavier than simply parroting of facts and figures.
Of course this is far harder for a teacher to evaluate than a simple multiple choice exam (I never had a single multiple choice test during my twelve years of basic education and three years at university). Therefore any student with the capacity to write coherently on the subject of their studies will at the very least be able to get a passing grade. Of course actually excelling requires the student to not only write coherently but to show real capacity for reason, and being able to correctly use and present in a way that shows their firm grasp of the matter at hand. The problem at the moment, at least with some courses, is that a student can read through the material and then simply float through the system by not being an idiot; i.e. getting passing grades by simply showing up and not write stuff that is utterly garbage.
I would agree that the implementation needs to motivate students to study harder and learn more, and to reward them when they do. Though there is a phrase that is the main doctrine for High School and above which is; Responsible for Your Own Education. Which means that students themselves are responsible for actively pursuing the knowledge required to improve in their field of study. Unfortunately statistics and psychology indicates that things aren't quite that simple. Especially when a student beginning high school is about sixteen and probably royally feed up with going to school as it is.
iTunes Norge have a severely limited selection of movies and series. In part because of the Norwegian Movie and Music industry, and in part because they refuse to follow Norwegian Law. Which is also why Apple/iTunes have threatened to boycott Norway several times. So iTunes is not a viable option since it does not provide what I want, and even if it did I couldn't be certain I would be able to access what I had purchased a few months, or years, down the line.
Personally I would be happy to pay Discovery money to be able to download or stream various programs they provide through the internet. But I will never pay for a lot of cable channels I am never going to use, or that requires me to buy recording devices to be able to watch said programming when I got the time and inclination to do so.
I guess the problem is that majority of programming suck, or at least that the broad scope of programs available through a cable package is so diverse that many only enjoy a small handful while the rest that falls outside the individual field of interest is uninteresting.
The tactic employed is to bundle "high quality" channels with "low quality" channels to ensure that if you want to buy the thing you are interesting you also have to buy a lot of crap that you don't are about. Selling individual channels, or smaller bundles, would mean you could probably ensure that what channels you get are those you actually want to watch; but it would also mean that a lot of marginal shows and channels would go out of business.
Of course personally I believe that this is pretty much inevitable and that shows and programming enjoyed by a smaller minority will have to find other ways to reach their targeted audience (like say the Internet). And it probably wont stop there either. In fact I would go so far as to say that over the next two decades the traditional way (in so far as something as new as cable can be said to have a tradition) of watching TV will change in many different ways. Using myself as an example I don't watch TV. Not because there aren't shows I would be interested in, but because I simply can not tailor my day around a programming schedule (nor am I inclined to buy a cable package and a Tivo like device). For me the only option when it comes to watching shows is getting them online (and I am sad to say the options for doing that legal is severely limited in my Country); so for the most part I just have to do without until reality catches up with technology and gives me options suited to my lifestyle.
So, yes, right now Youtube costs money, but that is called investment. It is what shareholders were supposed to be for.
This particular investment is costing Google (and its shareholders) about 2 million dollars a day; subtract revenue from that number and they end up spending about 1.65 million a day. Google Losing up to $1.65M a Day on YouTube. Now roughly calculated that means that Google will lose about 600 million dollars this year keeping YouTube alive. If I was an investor in Google I would be getting exceptionally sceptical to this particular investment.
Unless bandwidth becomes drastically cheaper in the immediate future Google will have to find a way to at least break even; if not they'll have to get rid of YouTube since despite any non-tangible reward they might gain from ownership is by far outweighed by the very tangible drain on the company's resources. Google might have more money than you can shake a big stick at; but 600 millions is not insignificant.
The bigger question is; When we DO get 3D porn will it make you believe, and create the memory, that you've had actually sex? And if it does; hi to you population decrease.
...but seems to be OK with the fact that the new movie, from all they've shown us so far, is a mindless sex and violence movie.
Oh my you just peaked my interest. Never been much of a Star Trek fanboy (though I have seen most of the movies, I am nerd after all), was pretty ambivalent about the new movie but I am always up for some sex and violence!
The immediate goal was 98% coverage by the end of 2007 and 100% as soon as it would be possible to get there. At the moment the coverage is at about 99.5% with an estimate that they will reach practically 100% by the end of the year. To achieve this goal they have so far given local governments 850 million NOK to build and improve infrastructure; and ISP and local commercial interests have contributed to; in total about 1.5 billion NOK has been spent.
If you can read Norwegian www.regjeringen.no has more info.
Here is a quote from 2007 by the then Norwegian Minister of Petroleum and Energy; Åslaug Haga
The quote is in Norwegian so I have tried to translate as best I can.
Creation of a broadband infrastructure is an important part of our [the party coalition in Government] goals for the districts. We can not accept that anyone in this country becomes losers in the digital evolution. Broadband also gives opportunities for economic development and growth. To ensure full broadband coverage the Government has decided to stimulate faster expansions of the infrastructure; especially in those areas were it isn't commercially profitable to do so.
Think of this as you will; but despite my disagreements with some of the things said and done by various ministers and the government in general; at one point I agree. Full broadband coverage is essential to modern life. It is a means of communication, of gaining information about what is happening, of paying your bills if the nearest bank is a day away, or an important tool for education or self-education. And much much more. Providing full coverage with affordable broadband should be a goal for any country that wish to ensure their citizens grain a high degree of familiarity with technology; and wish to remain competitive in the global market.
otherwise one probably has to assume that the proceedings touch 'national security'.
Actually it is because of all the subliminal messages the Government (read: our alien overlords that run the world) place in the music. Which is why I only listen to white noise from my old analogue radio! Cthulhu fhtagn!
"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."
If a nootropic came to exist that made you a whole bunch smarter, and a whole bunch less creative with no other obvious side effects - I think you can kiss creativity goodbye.
"Smarter" is a fairly vague term. Smarter how? Some activities (work related or not) require creativity for you to be effective. Not counting the obvious ones (like design, music, painting, architecture etc) I would say that a scientist or detective without creativity could be hyper intelligent and still not be able to produce a usable result; depending of course on what the desired result is. One could argue that making certain connections requires creativity.
That being said I find this area of research to be fascinating; even if it does at times make me a just a bit apprehensive.
The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It was caused by an unusually virulent and deadly Influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1. Historical and epidemiologic data are inadequate to identify the geographic origin of the virus.[1] Most of its victims were healthy young adults, in contrast to most influenza outbreaks which predominantly affect juvenile, elderly, or otherwise weakened patients. The pandemic lasted from March 1918 to June 1920, spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. It is estimated that anywhere from 20 to 100 million people were killed worldwide.
While we, at least industrialized countries, are far better equipped to deal with another major outbreak than in 1918; I feel taking precautions would be the rational thing to do.
or the next twenty-forty-sixty years for that matter. Depending on how long you live or when Cthulhu raises from the sea.
But I wonder how many people who are criticizing Time Warner over this really understand what they're arguing in favor of. They're arguing in favor of an economic system that is designed to be anti-competitive and to provide services for less than a private company ever could.
This is conjecture. Just because people are critical of the way TWC have handled this case, and just because they took matters into their own hand to find one solution (temporary or permanent}; does not mean that it have to lead to the implementation of a socialistic economic variation. Even if you accept that the solution they adopted here is moving into one of the fundamental concepts upon which the numerous variations of socialistic philosophy is based.
I would urge you, and others, to keep in mind that reality is not easily put into one category or another. Socialistic and Capitalistic concepts and ideas are not all Either Or; one or the other. What matters is practical implementation of ideas; something that makes no distinction between the various ideologies behind the implementations chosen or attempted.
While they people in question here might have taken the path the did because of perceived flaws in the system in place; does not mean anyone is advocating a total replacement of the system; or that following up on what they did with Greenlight will necessarily lead to the total implementation of a variant of a socialistic economical model; or that all socialistic economical models are hostile to all sorts of competition.
Of course on the last point I will agree; very few seem to understand this; or that reality is not easily divided into ideological camps. Few things are black and white, one or the other. Our society and government(s) are what we make them, shaped by our ideas and actions.
If the companies delivering internet doesn't deliver the speed or quality desired by the citizens of a region or city; then I see absolutely no problem with the people taking matters into their own hands. In fact I would call it democracy in practice. TWC trying to push legislation should be ruled as anti-competitive behaviour and they should be heavily fined.
If anything should be done it might be the privatization of the newly created service provider. The city should retain a minority controlling share, impose oversight and fair rules; and then let the company exist as a competitor. If TWC want to gain back their customers they should perhaps try to actually provide the services people want, at fair prices and with good service. Instead of using resources that could be better spent trying to hinder and punish citizens who's example should be honoured, respected and emulated.
Apparently the Extended version will run up to an hour longer than the Theatrical cut.
While the Watchmen movie wasn't perfect, and while it might not have earned as much as they wanted it to; I fully expect the DvD version of the movie to sell very very well.
In fact this is actually a fiendishly clever ploy to massively increase traffic to the site. Oh yes...