Rob Biederman tells Ars that AT&T's IPTV system is "neither cable, nor is it a telecommunications service." It's a data service, he says, and it is not regulated under the federal Cable Act.
So how does this fit in with their push for a tiered Internet? Is it "just data", or is it voice and high-bandwidth video that we need to be charged extra for? Which is it?
So you just always bid for a restuarant that nobody, under any circumstances, will ever actually want to go to. When you actually *want* to go somewhere in particular, you can outbid anybody else.
Anyway, my point is...this is great, except human nature will always win out. The system only works if people participate. To get maximum participation, you need some sort of incentive. As soon as there's incentive, people will figure out a way to game the system.
I'm too busy straining the gold out of seawater and reclaiming the platinum out of old catalytic converters to mess with melting down pennies and nickels...
I mean, how else are people going to be programmed to buy overpriced, useless crap? Won't you please help a hard-working advertising executive (who has enriched our culture with priceless works of art like this) afford his third Mercedes?
"Futurists" are full of crap. The Internet is neither a technological panacea nor the beginnings of Skynet; it's just another conduit for human communication. Wired still takes themselves too seriously.
Well, these two esteemed gentlemen appear to have rediscovered human nature. Congratulations.
Of course when people pay a lot of money for something, they want it to appear complex. How else are they going to impress their neighbors? That doesn't necessarily mean they want it to *be* complex to use. By the same token, if they didn't buy it as a status symbol, they want it to be simple and reliable.
Anytime you mix ego with money, you're going to see this soft of disconnect between what people say they want and what they actually spend their money on. Also, everyone is going to have their own particular set of requirements for maximum ego fulfillment. So I gues what these guys are trying to say is that consumer electronics manufacturers have much in common with the fashion industry these days.
The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.
Re:We want people to thrive and grow
on
Understanding Burnout
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I call bullshit. I've seen burnout first-hand. TFA says it best: "Getting the most out of people didn't actually mean getting the best."
An employer is *stupid* to "extract as much productivity as their morals allow with no consideration for burn out.'"
You sound like Stalin; marching an infantry battalion through a minefield is defintely an effective way to clear it, but don't expect the troops to be up for much of a fight the next day!
Does that fact that closed source software hides it's defects mean that it doesn't have any defects?
Or, how about the really important one:
Would you rather be at the mercy of your vendors to disclose (against their own self-interest) and fix security issues (on their own timetable); or would you rather have a multitude of people, who are dedicated to the values of openness and transparency, constantly striving to keep open source software as secure as possible?
...is exactly what the telcos do *not* want. If they actually had to list out all of the under-handed "traffic shaping" (ed. - I realize that there is a necessity for legitimate traffic shaping, but the potential for abuse is the whole point of this discussion) and hidden bandwith-capping that they engage in, then people would know what the whole Net Neutrality* debate is really about.
*I've said it before and I'll say it again, can we please come up with a better sobriquet than "Net Neutrality"?! How the hell am I supposed to get my family and friends interested in "neutrality"?
How about they create a "Hollywood Accounting" Merit Badge? The scouts can pursue activities like Screwing People Out of Money and Establishing a Distribution Monopoly? Or the "Hollywood Agent" Merit Badge; they can learn about Being A Money-Grubbing, Bloodsucking Parasite?
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't this merely serve to point out the absurdity of "Intellectual Property"?
So how does this fit in with their push for a tiered Internet? Is it "just data", or is it voice and high-bandwidth video that we need to be charged extra for? Which is it?
Doesn't this prove that "if you make it, someone will buy it?"
I always thought that was more than a little suspect, but the fact that *anyone* bought a Zune makes me reconsider.
So you just always bid for a restuarant that nobody, under any circumstances, will ever actually want to go to. When you actually *want* to go somewhere in particular, you can outbid anybody else.
Anyway, my point is...this is great, except human nature will always win out. The system only works if people participate. To get maximum participation, you need some sort of incentive. As soon as there's incentive, people will figure out a way to game the system.
P2P is a decent way to go for popular stuff, but it's not so great when you're looking for obscure stuff.
I'm too busy straining the gold out of seawater and reclaiming the platinum out of old catalytic converters to mess with melting down pennies and nickels...
Sounds like the batch of home-made beer my dad made when I was 10...
I mean, how else are people going to be programmed to buy overpriced, useless crap? Won't you please help a hard-working advertising executive (who has enriched our culture with priceless works of art like this) afford his third Mercedes?
"Futurists" are full of crap. The Internet is neither a technological panacea nor the beginnings of Skynet; it's just another conduit for human communication. Wired still takes themselves too seriously.
*yawn*
Well, these two esteemed gentlemen appear to have rediscovered human nature. Congratulations.
Of course when people pay a lot of money for something, they want it to appear complex. How else are they going to impress their neighbors? That doesn't necessarily mean they want it to *be* complex to use. By the same token, if they didn't buy it as a status symbol, they want it to be simple and reliable.
Anytime you mix ego with money, you're going to see this soft of disconnect between what people say they want and what they actually spend their money on. Also, everyone is going to have their own particular set of requirements for maximum ego fulfillment. So I gues what these guys are trying to say is that consumer electronics manufacturers have much in common with the fashion industry these days.
...this theory makes scents?
From reading TFA, it just sounds like he wants help designing the car for free...
Or will they donate all their posthumous royalties to that AIDS-in-Africa cause that they're always on about?
and he just piped the e-mail to /dev/null. All that e-mail was taking up too much disk space, anyways.
Wow, what a bunch of humorless assholes. I was *kidding* FFS!
I've used Apples since the II+, I own a MacBook Pro, and I love OS X.
Jeez, some poeple around here are desperately in need of a blowjob!
We all knew Mac users were wankers; and here they are admitting they play with their Wiis while using their Macs! ;-)
Seriously, though - this is cool. I'd love to see a program to control iTunes with gestures.
The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.
I call bullshit. I've seen burnout first-hand. TFA says it best: "Getting the most out of people didn't actually mean getting the best."
An employer is *stupid* to "extract as much productivity as their morals allow with no consideration for burn out.'"
You sound like Stalin; marching an infantry battalion through a minefield is defintely an effective way to clear it, but don't expect the troops to be up for much of a fight the next day!
Will it keep you young whippersnappers off my lawn?!
It doesn't work. I have proof
Ask your customer a simple question in reply:
Does that fact that closed source software hides it's defects mean that it doesn't have any defects?
Or, how about the really important one:
Would you rather be at the mercy of your vendors to disclose (against their own self-interest) and fix security issues (on their own timetable); or would you rather have a multitude of people, who are dedicated to the values of openness and transparency, constantly striving to keep open source software as secure as possible?
O RLY? How would you like to die today? We have a lovely selection of slow, painful ways to die. Nobody has a wider selection!
Just like every video format before it, the eventual winner here will take off when there is a decent selection of porn to be had.
...is exactly what the telcos do *not* want. If they actually had to list out all of the under-handed "traffic shaping" (ed. - I realize that there is a necessity for legitimate traffic shaping, but the potential for abuse is the whole point of this discussion) and hidden bandwith-capping that they engage in, then people would know what the whole Net Neutrality* debate is really about.
*I've said it before and I'll say it again, can we please come up with a better sobriquet than "Net Neutrality"?! How the hell am I supposed to get my family and friends interested in "neutrality"?
How about they create a "Hollywood Accounting" Merit Badge? The scouts can pursue activities like Screwing People Out of Money and Establishing a Distribution Monopoly? Or the "Hollywood Agent" Merit Badge; they can learn about Being A Money-Grubbing, Bloodsucking Parasite?