Power follows money. make informed purchase for reasons that encompass more than immediate gratification.
(Translation:"Buy directly from the artist whenever possible")
I think the parent post is correct in all the points he mentioned. Though i don't understand why high speed rail would be desirable everywhere. Though faster freight would be useful i don't know anything of freight cost per mile.
My understanding is that high speed rail would benefit most passengers that travel less than 200 miles between large cities by saving time though not very much if anything in money. Though after reading the article, the parent post and the experiences expressed in other posts, it's much easier to question original assumptions.
It is easy to see that in France and Japan high speed rail are an expression of national pride. Does that have value in this discussion? Probably not.
The funny thing about reading Slashdot is that it is easy to learn something new, Have a single question answered and be left with a dozen new questions.
Where will capacity be added to highways and airports in
large cities?
Why so much time is wasted in traffic jams?
What happened to N.H.T.S.A's C.A.F.E standards?
What is the real cost of imported petroleum?
My communitty is at least in part powered by nuclear energy and i am grateful for it. I am also admiring of the clever people that designed and built it. I am also reasonably certain never to see an accident there in my lifetime. But the risk is not zero. Do you understand has failed in a technology as complex as this?
When there is any competititive force to lower costs and safeguards will be reduced.
It is human nature to reduce effort to maximise gain.
Given enough time without an accident human nature will conspire to cause an accident.
If a single powerstion had a mean time to failure of 1,000 years how many stations would be built?
A hundred? A thousand?
What looked initially like a source of power too cheap to meter isn't.
Politics and human nature are the real risks of nuclear power nowhere is that clearer than the unsolved question of what to do with spent nuclear fuel.
Entertainment is a desire the more you have the more you want.
Price too high or you don't think they will be as straightforward as their written contract terms?
Get an ad supported station and make an attempt at buying more quality entertainment and downloading/stealing less.
Copyright holders aren't going to get any more generous than this after holding the line on price for years.
Don't like it?
Go to an online support group for internet addiction. and bring your CD player.
Unfortunately, I failed to include any mention of the economic issues of creating content protected by copyright.
And particularly of those of weighting economic gain by efficiently licensing use of content by creators to a larger audience.
This likely will direct the discussion into issues that are beyond difficult to measure in this forum. Far beyond the tools at hand. Certainly beyond me i believe, and into the realm of conjecture.
If you feel my argument is unsubstantiated also likely too generalized to be of use you are right.
Not really related to the topic but simply questions that are pestering me.
Because everyone enjoys the use of copyrights and few can dispute their value only the length of time and terms granted in licensing them.
Is it likely that those that can pay for a license would be more likely to pay if they felt that harm was being done by stealing and that using encryption and intimidation isn't enough? Wouldn't another additional measure be building consensus by releasing accurate and verifiable numbers related to economic damage?
Just another rambling slashdot post thank you for your patience if you have read this far.
I am forced to approach the eloquence of your argument with uncertainty. As I am not likely to equal it.
Please consider it the possibility, That copyright theft is more than symbolic of a desire to use the copyrighted material. Also that the holder of the legal protections that is a "copyright" isn't weighing the price asked properly or is providing use of the copyrighted material in an inefficient manner. Essentially market forces are always, inexorably, trying to induce efficiency.
~Best Wishes.
The Pirate Bay is a search engine for files hosted using a specific protocol. The bittorrent protocol is the most innovative use of cooperative distributed storage. Not new it has been around for about a decade. Bandwidth efficient? no. The ISP each of us purchases services from hate it.
The bittorrent protocol offers the individual the otherwise impossible opportunity to "publish" works larger than a web page and reach a wide audience. Encryption is just another advancement along the way towards greater control for creators of content. You read that right.
In time there will be a very similar protocol that provides for encrypted key servers to enable the content we have purchased from small in (business terms) content creators. It should sound very familiar. Encrypting content and purchasing keys isn't in any way innovative. The problems inherent in encryption won't be solved by anyone but some questions will find answers. Certainly the Bittorrent protocol or one like it is worth safeguarding.
The questions asked in this trial will find easy answers.
Obviously ownership of copyrights is easily solvable but, other seemingly intractable questions remain.
Freedom of information in search engines.
Freedom to use and definition of, non standard internet protocols including encrypted protocols.
Jurisdiction and definitions of free trade across borders. After all is said and done which government will receive tax money from creators and purchasers of content. Taxes are inevitable.
What organization will define copyrights.
How can encryption be both secure and open to examination by individuals and governments.
These questions will put individual internet users at a disadvantage and vex lawmakers, judges and mathematicians for decades.
Technology often provides more questions even in mundane uses than answers.
I probably spend way too much time using a computer.
Windows just isn't changeable enough. Microsoft generously offers dozens of free tools and utilities to change things a little bit at a time but, There isn't one central utility to access the many things that can be changed. Yes, there is the registry but that often takes many minutes of Google-ing to find what is needed.
The arrival of even lower cost computing should hasten the profitable arrival of the O.L.P.C. A lot of very charitable people have spent considerable hours on this project. It will happen now with great effort or a decade or more from now.
The hope is that it will happen sooner and be profitable.
GNU Software isn't simply the free initial cost it is also the flexibility to change it to meet your needs, and in this case you might easily assume that meant security also.
If a government agency as large as they are could easily afford Microsoft and some access to MS Windows source code and chose GNU what were the other considerations?
Competition is always good and an entirely homogeneous OS culture slows innovation and runs the risk of a single point of failure.
It's tempting to draw a conclusion like that. Not easy in any way to validate. Unreal, Quake, or whatever series has highs and lows.
The long delay in release of UT3 had to hurt sales i think. Maybe a historical search of articles discussing UT3 prior to release over time would reveal that.
I think the menu system was too many clicks away from getting online quickly. Why can't you export your favorite server as a desktop shortcut?
First you mix it up then you pour it onto a lattice. a bit like making waffles. - Don't miss the overlook red indicator light turning green or the wafer will be too crispy.
DRM and Piracy two sides of the same coin neither will be completely eliminated.
The real questions are how much investment does a content provider need to produce something of value and, does the customer agree with the producers estimated valuation.
Value is always estimated best by a well informed consumer.
DRM may be necessary but so is complete information about the product being purchased. As few of us are capable of understanding the complexity of electronic systems we must rely on experts to inform us. The D.M.C.A. limits the ability of the consumer to make an informed decision of a products true value to them.
The extension of the protections on copyrights does provide value to content providers. The only problem never to be solved is the definition of derivative works.
I don't think the pirate bay will win but, they do provide positive benefits. Pressure on media producers to provide more convenience and lower price to their paying customers.
Entertainment should provide income to those people producing it.
The question of links to information being a crime is one that won't go away in our lifetime.
Canonical has done quite a lot to advance the linux desktop.
It is free software and has no "retail" feature limited version.
The repositories and package manager are fully functional.
Their forums are excellent and free.
If you find Ubuntu useful why wouldn't you offer them something for their service?
The ROM can be pointed to one place on disk but it can't prove what it is booting is the vote counting program. The Media to install the voting program can contain malware to blind other OS'es to it's presence. Wherever you look in digital voting adding another layer of security introduces another potential point of failure.
Binary code is still the best thing there is for voting. Yes or No on paper with ink or a chad.
Slashdot Mirror
Imaginative - practical why? This is slashdot after all. - grin
Power follows money. make informed purchase for reasons that encompass more than immediate gratification. (Translation:"Buy directly from the artist whenever possible")
Power follows money spend your dollars wisely.
Why doesn't "A large media company" TM recognize the the piratebay as an unserved market and see revenue potential?
I think the parent post is correct in all the points he mentioned. Though i don't understand why high speed rail would be desirable everywhere. Though faster freight would be useful i don't know anything of freight cost per mile. My understanding is that high speed rail would benefit most passengers that travel less than 200 miles between large cities by saving time though not very much if anything in money. Though after reading the article, the parent post and the experiences expressed in other posts, it's much easier to question original assumptions. It is easy to see that in France and Japan high speed rail are an expression of national pride. Does that have value in this discussion? Probably not. The funny thing about reading Slashdot is that it is easy to learn something new, Have a single question answered and be left with a dozen new questions. Where will capacity be added to highways and airports in large cities? Why so much time is wasted in traffic jams? What happened to N.H.T.S.A's C.A.F.E standards? What is the real cost of imported petroleum?
Joke: John Maynard Keynes, Adam Smith, and ArsonSmith Walk into The Charles Dickens Bar...
I shouldn't be surprised to find an informed and insightful opinion on slashdot, but i always am. - Thank you very much for your post.
My communitty is at least in part powered by nuclear energy and i am grateful for it. I am also admiring of the clever people that designed and built it. I am also reasonably certain never to see an accident there in my lifetime. But the risk is not zero. Do you understand has failed in a technology as complex as this? When there is any competititive force to lower costs and safeguards will be reduced. It is human nature to reduce effort to maximise gain. Given enough time without an accident human nature will conspire to cause an accident. If a single powerstion had a mean time to failure of 1,000 years how many stations would be built? A hundred? A thousand? What looked initially like a source of power too cheap to meter isn't. Politics and human nature are the real risks of nuclear power nowhere is that clearer than the unsolved question of what to do with spent nuclear fuel.
Entertainment is a desire the more you have the more you want. Price too high or you don't think they will be as straightforward as their written contract terms? Get an ad supported station and make an attempt at buying more quality entertainment and downloading/stealing less. Copyright holders aren't going to get any more generous than this after holding the line on price for years. Don't like it? Go to an online support group for internet addiction. and bring your CD player.
Unfortunately, I failed to include any mention of the economic issues of creating content protected by copyright. And particularly of those of weighting economic gain by efficiently licensing use of content by creators to a larger audience. This likely will direct the discussion into issues that are beyond difficult to measure in this forum. Far beyond the tools at hand. Certainly beyond me i believe, and into the realm of conjecture. If you feel my argument is unsubstantiated also likely too generalized to be of use you are right. Not really related to the topic but simply questions that are pestering me. Because everyone enjoys the use of copyrights and few can dispute their value only the length of time and terms granted in licensing them. Is it likely that those that can pay for a license would be more likely to pay if they felt that harm was being done by stealing and that using encryption and intimidation isn't enough? Wouldn't another additional measure be building consensus by releasing accurate and verifiable numbers related to economic damage? Just another rambling slashdot post thank you for your patience if you have read this far.
I am forced to approach the eloquence of your argument with uncertainty. As I am not likely to equal it. Please consider it the possibility, That copyright theft is more than symbolic of a desire to use the copyrighted material. Also that the holder of the legal protections that is a "copyright" isn't weighing the price asked properly or is providing use of the copyrighted material in an inefficient manner. Essentially market forces are always, inexorably, trying to induce efficiency. ~Best Wishes.
The Pirate Bay is a search engine for files hosted using a specific protocol. The bittorrent protocol is the most innovative use of cooperative distributed storage. Not new it has been around for about a decade. Bandwidth efficient? no. The ISP each of us purchases services from hate it.
The bittorrent protocol offers the individual the otherwise impossible opportunity to "publish" works larger than a web page and reach a wide audience. Encryption is just another advancement along the way towards greater control for creators of content. You read that right.
In time there will be a very similar protocol that provides for encrypted key servers to enable the content we have purchased from small in (business terms) content creators. It should sound very familiar. Encrypting content and purchasing keys isn't in any way innovative. The problems inherent in encryption won't be solved by anyone but some questions will find answers.
Certainly the Bittorrent protocol or one like it is worth safeguarding.
The questions asked in this trial will find easy answers.
Obviously ownership of copyrights is easily solvable but, other seemingly intractable questions remain.
Freedom of information in search engines.
Freedom to use and definition of, non standard internet protocols including encrypted protocols.
Jurisdiction and definitions of free trade across borders.
After all is said and done which government will receive tax money from creators and purchasers of content. Taxes are inevitable.
What organization will define copyrights.
How can encryption be both secure and open to examination by individuals and governments.
These questions will put individual internet users at a disadvantage and vex lawmakers, judges and mathematicians for decades.
Technology often provides more questions even in mundane uses than answers.
I probably spend way too much time using a computer.
Windows just isn't changeable enough. Microsoft generously offers dozens of free tools and utilities to change things a little bit at a time but, There isn't one central utility to access the many things that can be changed. Yes, there is the registry but that often takes many minutes of Google-ing to find what is needed.
"Tragedy of the commons" - Someone paid for the intermediate bandwidth everyone paid with time because traffic slowed. Network neutrality indeed...
The arrival of even lower cost computing should hasten the profitable arrival of the O.L.P.C. A lot of very charitable people have spent considerable hours on this project. It will happen now with great effort or a decade or more from now.
The hope is that it will happen sooner and be profitable.
Smaller, cheaper, faster, interconnected, ubiquitous!
GNU Software isn't simply the free initial cost it is also the flexibility to change it to meet your needs, and in this case you might easily assume that meant security also.
If a government agency as large as they are could easily afford Microsoft and some access to MS Windows source code and chose GNU what were the other considerations?
Competition is always good and an entirely homogeneous OS culture slows innovation and runs the risk of a single point of failure.
It's tempting to draw a conclusion like that. Not easy in any way to validate. Unreal, Quake, or whatever series has highs and lows. The long delay in release of UT3 had to hurt sales i think. Maybe a historical search of articles discussing UT3 prior to release over time would reveal that. I think the menu system was too many clicks away from getting online quickly. Why can't you export your favorite server as a desktop shortcut?
First you mix it up then you pour it onto a lattice. a bit like making waffles. - Don't miss the overlook red indicator light turning green or the wafer will be too crispy.
DRM and Piracy two sides of the same coin neither will be completely eliminated.
The real questions are how much investment does a content provider need to produce something of value and, does the customer agree with the producers estimated valuation.
Value is always estimated best by a well informed consumer.
DRM may be necessary but so is complete information about the product being purchased. As few of us are capable of understanding the complexity of electronic systems we must rely on experts to inform us. The D.M.C.A. limits the ability of the consumer to make an informed decision of a products true value to them.
The extension of the protections on copyrights does provide value to content providers. The only problem never to be solved is the definition of derivative works.
I don't think the pirate bay will win but, they do provide positive benefits. Pressure on media producers to provide more convenience and lower price to their paying customers. Entertainment should provide income to those people producing it. The question of links to information being a crime is one that won't go away in our lifetime.
Canonical has done quite a lot to advance the linux desktop. It is free software and has no "retail" feature limited version. The repositories and package manager are fully functional. Their forums are excellent and free. If you find Ubuntu useful why wouldn't you offer them something for their service?
Contribute to some open source projects?
Apple just keeps getting better.
The ROM can be pointed to one place on disk but it can't prove what it is booting is the vote counting program. The Media to install the voting program can contain malware to blind other OS'es to it's presence. Wherever you look in digital voting adding another layer of security introduces another potential point of failure. Binary code is still the best thing there is for voting. Yes or No on paper with ink or a chad.