The same things were written about XP when it was in Beta, and the same things will be written about the successor to Vista. And the Xbox and Server 2003 and each version of Office. And MSSQL and WMV.
I've been reading Slashdot for a long time and it never ceases to amaze me that at no time has the groupthink expected a Microsoft product to be a success. And with each new kernel release Linux's time has finally come, the world will be running Debian with whatever the open source productivity suite is currently in vogue, and I'll be doing all my photo editing with gimp.
For people who seem to see every choice as binary, I guess I shouldn't be suprised.
But those who made the actual creative effort voluntarily chose to ally with these rights holders in order to get their games and TV shows and such created and distributed. I don't see how that makes copyright out of whack.
There is no such thing as a neutral source of information and analysis.
Your typical private sector scientist isn't going to publish a whole lot that doesn't go through a marketing department first, and your typical public sector one is in a similar position apart from the fact that various other words are substituted for 'marketing'.
A close look at the graphs and charts used in the presentation usually gives away a bias toward one thing or another. You also have to consider the data the report was based on, which in this case means you'd have to take a look at BP and ASPO.
Also figure that in the first handful of posts here, at Slashdot, a site started by someone who answers to the name "Commander Taco", you have various disagreements about how to extrapolate data into the future, how nanotechnology will totally obviate the need for any oil at all, and nanotubes, and nanites, and several other figments of people's imaginations that contain the characters "nano". You have to consider that the author of the report had several options available to him about how to handle this particular issue, as well as hundreds of others, and he picked one and went with it. Most likely the desire to make a point one way or the other figured into the choice.
So, no unbiased reports are out there. If you start seeing all of it as propaganda, and think about it all critically, you'll be ahead of the game.
People probably would, despite the fact that the Executive branch of the US government does not set tax law. Now if the chair of the Ways and Means committee said it it might mean something.
I keep some potassium iodide in my shirt pocket at all times, and I've yet to be harmed by a nuclear warhead, cesium, or the vaingloriously named americanium.
Were you under the impression that the "us" and "them" conflict wasn't already in orbit?
While it is fashionable to blame George W Bush for everything bad, and to seek out something bad in every action attributed to him, the reality is a little larger in scope. The indiduals who compose your government and everyone else's are right now plotting to further their own interests at the expense of everyone else. They were also doing it yesterday, and by yesterday I mean all the way back to inception of goverment, regardless of the name given to the one guy marched out in front of everyone for complaints to be pinned to.
It is funny that when viewing the slide show about technological innovations I have to click my mouse button twice, or move the mouse a little, to get the navigation buttons to work. If I leave the pointer positioned over the button when a new slide opens it is somehow no longer recognized as a button until I take some action.
Of course I'm stuck with IE 6 at the moment, so this problem may not afflict more capable browsers.
But they would never 'discover' that, because they can't sell themselves or their peers security software.
A more newsworthy headline, even aside from the fact that 'Extent of Government Computers Infected by Bots Uncertain' really has no relevant meaning at all and anyone who paid to get a report with that title should demand a refund, would be if a security software company audited someone's machines and reached the conclusion that no, you do not need to buy anything from us.
The restriction on using this system with US news sources likely comes from the Privacy Act of 1974 as this AI necessarily maintains records and falls under the definition of a 'computer matching system'. I also suspect that it tracks individual authors in an attempt to detect trends.
Offhand I don't recall where, but somewhere in there is a prohibition against using such things to monitor exercises of First Amendment rights.
The difficult thing for me to reconcile, and I've seen quite a few different points along the scale of how people live, is how to avoid being grotesque and over-consuming while at the same time insulating yourself against the possibility that grotesque over-consumers will one day show up want you to join their ranks.
Maybe they get you by offering an irresistable culture, or maybe they get you at gunpoint, but they always seem to get you.
I know competition. I also understand photographers wanting to have their photos seen, many very good ones pay for the ability to do so at places like PBase.com. I've had photos published in Lens Work without any direct compensation from the publishers of Lens Work.
Reagardless, PBase and JPG Magazine and Lens Work are all a world apart from getting your snapshot printed in some sidebar of your local newspaper. The latter is not going to bring you any significant notoriety in the world of professional photography while the others very well may. Even if you are not looking for such notoriety, at the end of the day you are just providing content to a media outlet without any compensation at all.
As for the quality of the shots themselves, we each value things differently. The woman who arranges my travel decorates her work space with poorly made photos of her children. I understand why she likes them but I also know that they carry little weight for anyone outside her family and while she may want to publish them on the web, I don't quite see the point. She isn't going to replace Kadir von Lohuizen any time soon regardless of how we manipulate the definition of quality.
But I do see value in deveoping news sources apart from the conventional media outlets, both text and photo journalism and I do think this particular effort offers much more compensation on the whole relative to newspapers asking for photo submissions.
Wal-Mart has made their money in the grocery business in part by offering a purposely limited selection in order to drive down their costs. The last time I was in one I tried to find a mango and was met with both the absence of any mangos and widespread disbelief among the staff that such a thing as a mango even existed, which is probably part of the ploy to get people to accept the hobbled selection.
Speaking as a professional photographer, who has had other photographers in his employ, I can assure you that a newpaper clipping of your voluntarily submitted snapshot isn't going to impress me much. Nor would I be impressed if you presented it as part of your portfolio and by way of notation communicated to me that your local news station had used it as part of their story on the local pie eating contest.
Unless, of course, it is an excellent photograph on its own. In that case I would not need to rely on the opinion of whichever intern is assigned to sort through the emailed photograph submissions, being that I know good photos from bad ones on my own.
As for the FOSS associations, yes, those often help.
Find yourself a copy of USA Today. There is a rambling story about bloggers being sued by various entities, indicating that other companies and organizations are indeed watching.
A thing I have noticed a lot of, probably due to my profession, are traditional media outlets asking for digital photographs to be emailed to them for help with covering events. Which I have always thought was silly.
I cannot understand why anyone would email a photograph to a company to help them out. I know why they do it, to see their name in the paper or hear it mentioned on the news, but I don't understand it.
In the case of Citizen Journalism outlets I can understand the motivation. Maybe question the economy of hosting snapshot collections for 'everyone', given the usefulness of your average snapshot, but this is certainly a much better model.
Digital High-Speed Camera
VeraTech Aero's revolutionary High speed, rotating camera and image correcting circuitry.
Our ultra-High speed shutter system can capture an image anywhere on the horizon. This camera can actually view a 360 spherical radius
Followed by a large graphic stating the page contains proprietary information.
A 360 spherical radius, these people are dealing with some serious technology for sure.
The site has a photo of two kids in flea market knockoff BDUs. One is wearing set of, probably broken, VR goggles and the other has $7.99 Tasco folding binoculars around his neck.
Somehow I get the feeling these people are not going to impress anyone in US military procurement enough to get much more than laughed at.
Yes but the DRM stripped files make it to the file sharing networks pretty quickly.
I would imagine only a small percentage of iTunes users have apps like Hymn, but most of the popular file sharing networks have plenty of 'iTunes only' content.
PC-Cillin is pretty good. Panda ain't bad if you just install the AV portion, same for F-Secure.
What I don't understand is why there is any market at all that pays for consumer grade AV software. There more than 12 30 day demo versions out there. By the time I'm finished 'evaluating' each of them the new versions are out and I have to start all over again.
Slashdot Mirror
The same things were written about XP when it was in Beta, and the same things will be written about the successor to Vista. And the Xbox and Server 2003 and each version of Office. And MSSQL and WMV.
I've been reading Slashdot for a long time and it never ceases to amaze me that at no time has the groupthink expected a Microsoft product to be a success. And with each new kernel release Linux's time has finally come, the world will be running Debian with whatever the open source productivity suite is currently in vogue, and I'll be doing all my photo editing with gimp.
For people who seem to see every choice as binary, I guess I shouldn't be suprised.
But those who made the actual creative effort voluntarily chose to ally with these rights holders in order to get their games and TV shows and such created and distributed. I don't see how that makes copyright out of whack.
There is no such thing as a neutral source of information and analysis.
Your typical private sector scientist isn't going to publish a whole lot that doesn't go through a marketing department first, and your typical public sector one is in a similar position apart from the fact that various other words are substituted for 'marketing'.
A close look at the graphs and charts used in the presentation usually gives away a bias toward one thing or another. You also have to consider the data the report was based on, which in this case means you'd have to take a look at BP and ASPO.
Also figure that in the first handful of posts here, at Slashdot, a site started by someone who answers to the name "Commander Taco", you have various disagreements about how to extrapolate data into the future, how nanotechnology will totally obviate the need for any oil at all, and nanotubes, and nanites, and several other figments of people's imaginations that contain the characters "nano". You have to consider that the author of the report had several options available to him about how to handle this particular issue, as well as hundreds of others, and he picked one and went with it. Most likely the desire to make a point one way or the other figured into the choice.
So, no unbiased reports are out there. If you start seeing all of it as propaganda, and think about it all critically, you'll be ahead of the game.
People probably would, despite the fact that the Executive branch of the US government does not set tax law. Now if the chair of the Ways and Means committee said it it might mean something.
Hell if it won't.
I keep some potassium iodide in my shirt pocket at all times, and I've yet to be harmed by a nuclear warhead, cesium, or the vaingloriously named americanium.
Were you under the impression that the "us" and "them" conflict wasn't already in orbit?
While it is fashionable to blame George W Bush for everything bad, and to seek out something bad in every action attributed to him, the reality is a little larger in scope. The indiduals who compose your government and everyone else's are right now plotting to further their own interests at the expense of everyone else. They were also doing it yesterday, and by yesterday I mean all the way back to inception of goverment, regardless of the name given to the one guy marched out in front of everyone for complaints to be pinned to.
It is funny that when viewing the slide show about technological innovations I have to click my mouse button twice, or move the mouse a little, to get the navigation buttons to work. If I leave the pointer positioned over the button when a new slide opens it is somehow no longer recognized as a button until I take some action.
Of course I'm stuck with IE 6 at the moment, so this problem may not afflict more capable browsers.
But they would never 'discover' that, because they can't sell themselves or their peers security software. A more newsworthy headline, even aside from the fact that 'Extent of Government Computers Infected by Bots Uncertain' really has no relevant meaning at all and anyone who paid to get a report with that title should demand a refund, would be if a security software company audited someone's machines and reached the conclusion that no, you do not need to buy anything from us.
The restriction on using this system with US news sources likely comes from the Privacy Act of 1974 as this AI necessarily maintains records and falls under the definition of a 'computer matching system'. I also suspect that it tracks individual authors in an attempt to detect trends. Offhand I don't recall where, but somewhere in there is a prohibition against using such things to monitor exercises of First Amendment rights.
Ok, here is my IPL bill for September:
Rate RS - Residential/Family
No units listed, but the "PREV" reading was 78632, "PRES" reading is 79390 for a useage of 758. Charges are $60.45, putting me at $0.0797/unit.
Tax is $3.63 for a total bill of $64.08.
Windmill not cheap enough, even before I consider maintenance costs.
The difficult thing for me to reconcile, and I've seen quite a few different points along the scale of how people live, is how to avoid being grotesque and over-consuming while at the same time insulating yourself against the possibility that grotesque over-consumers will one day show up want you to join their ranks.
Maybe they get you by offering an irresistable culture, or maybe they get you at gunpoint, but they always seem to get you.
Clever.
Scientology has already won.
I know competition. I also understand photographers wanting to have their photos seen, many very good ones pay for the ability to do so at places like PBase.com. I've had photos published in Lens Work without any direct compensation from the publishers of Lens Work.
Reagardless, PBase and JPG Magazine and Lens Work are all a world apart from getting your snapshot printed in some sidebar of your local newspaper. The latter is not going to bring you any significant notoriety in the world of professional photography while the others very well may. Even if you are not looking for such notoriety, at the end of the day you are just providing content to a media outlet without any compensation at all.
As for the quality of the shots themselves, we each value things differently. The woman who arranges my travel decorates her work space with poorly made photos of her children. I understand why she likes them but I also know that they carry little weight for anyone outside her family and while she may want to publish them on the web, I don't quite see the point. She isn't going to replace Kadir von Lohuizen any time soon regardless of how we manipulate the definition of quality.
But I do see value in deveoping news sources apart from the conventional media outlets, both text and photo journalism and I do think this particular effort offers much more compensation on the whole relative to newspapers asking for photo submissions.
I wish Bank Street Writer would make a comeback.
Wal-Mart has made their money in the grocery business in part by offering a purposely limited selection in order to drive down their costs. The last time I was in one I tried to find a mango and was met with both the absence of any mangos and widespread disbelief among the staff that such a thing as a mango even existed, which is probably part of the ploy to get people to accept the hobbled selection.
Speaking as a professional photographer, who has had other photographers in his employ, I can assure you that a newpaper clipping of your voluntarily submitted snapshot isn't going to impress me much. Nor would I be impressed if you presented it as part of your portfolio and by way of notation communicated to me that your local news station had used it as part of their story on the local pie eating contest.
Unless, of course, it is an excellent photograph on its own. In that case I would not need to rely on the opinion of whichever intern is assigned to sort through the emailed photograph submissions, being that I know good photos from bad ones on my own.
As for the FOSS associations, yes, those often help.
Find yourself a copy of USA Today. There is a rambling story about bloggers being sued by various entities, indicating that other companies and organizations are indeed watching.
If you think that an agent of Microsoft isn't reading Slashdot you are way off base.
I'm sure at one time no one thought Scientology was reading, but we all know that isn't true.
A thing I have noticed a lot of, probably due to my profession, are traditional media outlets asking for digital photographs to be emailed to them for help with covering events. Which I have always thought was silly.
I cannot understand why anyone would email a photograph to a company to help them out. I know why they do it, to see their name in the paper or hear it mentioned on the news, but I don't understand it.
In the case of Citizen Journalism outlets I can understand the motivation. Maybe question the economy of hosting snapshot collections for 'everyone', given the usefulness of your average snapshot, but this is certainly a much better model.
Followed by a large graphic stating the page contains proprietary information.
A 360 spherical radius, these people are dealing with some serious technology for sure.
The site has a photo of two kids in flea market knockoff BDUs. One is wearing set of, probably broken, VR goggles and the other has $7.99 Tasco folding binoculars around his neck.
Somehow I get the feeling these people are not going to impress anyone in US military procurement enough to get much more than laughed at.
Yes but the DRM stripped files make it to the file sharing networks pretty quickly.
I would imagine only a small percentage of iTunes users have apps like Hymn, but most of the popular file sharing networks have plenty of 'iTunes only' content.
PC-Cillin is pretty good. Panda ain't bad if you just install the AV portion, same for F-Secure.
What I don't understand is why there is any market at all that pays for consumer grade AV software. There more than 12 30 day demo versions out there. By the time I'm finished 'evaluating' each of them the new versions are out and I have to start all over again.
We ignorant outcast hillbillies use Wild Blue, our packets are blasted straight up into the heavens, god itself is our gateway (and DHCP server).
At least when we are staying at our hunting cabins. Back in the city we use Comcast.