March 9, 2012 at 7:11 am
Greg Edwards-268690 (3/9/2012)
Denver was in the news today.I wonder if Steve saw the Weekend At Bernie's guys?
Sounds like they took a dead buddy out to a strip club for a bit.
What were they thinking?
Didn't see that. Volleyball day for my daughter and me.
What idiots: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/real-life-weekend-at-bernies-in-denver/
March 9, 2012 at 7:12 am
bitbucket-25253 (3/8/2012)
Evil Kraig F (3/8/2012)
L' Eomot Inversé (3/8/2012)
mtillman-921105 (3/6/2012)
Look, the first invisible car?I think it might create some problems if those were let loose in traffic.;-)
I want two... I know I'm end up wrecked in the first one...
First problem would be how would you find your invisible car and if you walked into it .. next how would you find the door key lock to open the door so you could drive it ?
all I can think of is the Emporer's New Clothes...here, let me sell you an invisible car...
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 9, 2012 at 7:13 am
GilaMonster (3/9/2012)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/8/2012)
L' Eomot Inversé (3/8/2012)
If it were a non-USA site, then SOPA might apply;We are a non-US site. Based in the UK. 😀
However the way SOPA classified sites (yes, I read the relevant sections, though of which version I don't recall) is based on the domain name. SSC is a .com, which is classified a US domain suffix and hence it gets classified a US site regardless of where it's hosted.
My blog is hosted in the US but because of the domain (.co.za) would be classified a non-US site solely on that basis.
I guess that makes sense, given the target was DNS servers, but it seems weird to me. So I could host my site in the Ukrainse where few laws apply, use a .com, and be exempted from SOPA? Crazy.
March 9, 2012 at 7:13 am
L' Eomot Inversé (3/8/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/7/2012)
Wow, I bet a lot of businesses will freak out over this. Small, Mid-size and Smaller "large" companies have a lot of systems that still run IE6, mostly because they haven't tested them with anything newer. I know quite a few still mandate IE6 on their desktops/laptops. Then there are all the businesses that still have XP or older and are going to worry about moving from IE6.Almost everyone I know who uses XP runs IE8 on it. Even I use IE 8 on the rare occassions I'm not using Firefox or Opera or Chrome (that last runs on this laptop only under a user restricted to running chrome and nothing else and with extremely restricted filestore access, because I don't trust google's privacy policy as far as I could throw Mont Blanc). I guess "or older" could be a problem, though.
My workplace only recently upgraded to IE7. They ignored my disparaging comments.
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 9, 2012 at 7:19 am
Koen Verbeeck (3/9/2012)
L' Eomot Inversé (3/9/2012)
..., but it would be much better if people would behave decently so that we didn't need such a law.I pay here 21% taxes on CDs. I only pay 6% on books because they fall under culture/arts. (Since when is music not an art?)
Which means that CDs are ridicously overpriced in Belgium (and most likely in other countries too).
don't forget that legislators are people too (well, there is some doubt about some of them, bu I give them the benefit of the doubt) so the desire for people to behave decently applies to them too. Currently I buy most books in the UK (no sales tax or VAT {belasting over de toegevoegde waarde}) and most CDs in Provincia de Las Palmas of SPAIN where IGIC on CDs is 5% (but some in UK for delivery to Las Palmas, which costs postage but no tax unless Spanish customs decides to be awkward). If legislators were decent books would be 0-rated everywhere, and maybe 5% would be the maximum tax on cultural things.
I also pay copyright taxes on empty storage (interprete that as you want. Blank CDs, hard drives, USB sticks).
In the UK it is currently not permitted to make copies of copyright material onto new media, so there is no copyright levy on empty storage. I think this will change - the current government wants to give the permission without imposing the levy, but can't find a way of doing this without breaking EU directives. For some storage media, only a tiny fraction would be used for such copying so the levy, if there is one, should be tiny, but for other media it may be the most common use so the levy should be larger; this is impossible to get right without it being very complicated, so I don't know what will happen.
I pay copyright taxes on my cable television. The copyright firm here in Belgium also wants the ISPs to give a few percentages of their profit as copyright tax.
No copyright taxes on TV in UK or Spain (but in UK TV costs about 175 euros per year, which goes towards funding the BBC). Some of the copyright owners in the UK are agitating for payment from ISPs, but haven't yet got it (they are as greedy and as stupid as coyright owners anywhere else). I don't think it is happening in Spain, but not sure.
One could figure that so many copyright taxes have already been paid, everything could be downloaded freely. (take that with a bit of salt)
Sometimes I get that feeling too; the extensions that have been granted to duration of copyright seem to be heading towards a perpetual right, which would be a disaster (since most copyright owners stop making the material available, even at silly high prices, as soon as the initial high-volume sales fall to lower levels).
(and don't get me started on the copyright firm here in Belgium. They are more organized crime than "the defenders of the poor little artist")
Seems to be true in most countries; certainly most of the big outfits are determined to ensure that the creators or the copyright works get as small a share as possible of the profit from selling the works, and seem to be making little of no attempt to connect with modern technology in any useful way. There are some honorable exceptions (Baen Books in the USA, for example) but they aren't really big outfits.
I have an idea that if the copyright owners played sensibly (not going to happen unless they are forced by legislation) and consumers played fair and serious copyright violation stopped happening (not going to happen unless criminality suddenly becomes unthinkable) books, music and films would make more money for the creators and more money for the distributors/sales outlets at the same time as costing the consumers less than they do now. Of course it would make much less money for lawyers and other parasites, so legal systems will always be designed to ensure that it doesn't happen even if by some miracle the big copyright owners grow some common sense and the pople who will spend great effort to avoid paying even a reasonable price grow some common sense too; one side effect of this is that the legal system will always hurt the little people, not the big crooks who really do rip off copyright material wholesale and make it a commercial venture.
Or maybe I've become too cynical, having watched the idiocy being acted out in the USA and in the UK.
Tom
March 9, 2012 at 7:22 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/9/2012)
Greg Edwards-268690 (3/9/2012)
Denver was in the news today.I wonder if Steve saw the Weekend At Bernie's guys?
Sounds like they took a dead buddy out to a strip club for a bit.
What were they thinking?
Didn't see that. Volleyball day for my daughter and me.
What idiots: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/real-life-weekend-at-bernies-in-denver/
Guess their night of fun(?) will end up a bit different than they imagined.
Thought you'd like to know since you live in the area.
March 9, 2012 at 7:31 am
L' Eomot Inversé (3/9/2012)
In the UK it is currently not permitted to make copies of copyright material onto new media, so there is no copyright levy on empty storage. I think this will change - the current government wants to give the permission without imposing the levy, but can't find a way of doing this without breaking EU directives. For some storage media, only a tiny fraction would be used for such copying so the levy, if there is one, should be tiny, but for other media it may be the most common use so the levy should be larger; this is impossible to get right without it being very complicated, so I don't know what will happen.
In Belgium we can legally take one copy of the copyrighted material. (some sort of back-up)
So I have to pay copyright taxes on empty storage to exercise my right of taking a copy of material that I've paid for. Somehow everyone gets punished for the deeds of few...
(this makes copyprotected CDs, like those of Sony, actually illegal in Belgium, as you cannot take your legal copy)
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
March 9, 2012 at 7:48 am
L' Eomot Inversé (3/8/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/7/2012)
Wow, I bet a lot of businesses will freak out over this. Small, Mid-size and Smaller "large" companies have a lot of systems that still run IE6, mostly because they haven't tested them with anything newer. I know quite a few still mandate IE6 on their desktops/laptops. Then there are all the businesses that still have XP or older and are going to worry about moving from IE6.Almost everyone I know who uses XP runs IE8 on it. Even I use IE 8 on the rare occassions I'm not using Firefox or Opera or Chrome (that last runs on this laptop only under a user restricted to running chrome and nothing else and with extremely restricted filestore access, because I don't trust google's privacy policy as far as I could throw Mont Blanc). I guess "or older" could be a problem, though.
That's nice, but of the last 3 companies I've worked for, all 3 still mandated IE 6 as the only version on their XP machines.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
March 9, 2012 at 7:52 am
L' Eomot Inversé (3/9/2012)
Jeff Moden (3/8/2012)
I guess I'll have to take the same position as some other folks have taken. As it was written, SOPA is a terrible instrument and I'm glad it was defeated. That notwithstanding, I'd still like to have some recourse against websites that intentionally violate copyright and other laws.Actually, what I'd really like is for people to... ah... never mind. Total pipe dream especially since people are involved.
I guess you and I have pretty much the same views on the question - we need is a decent law that deals properly with intentional violation, but it would be much better if people would behave decently so that we didn't need such a law.
When DMCA was passed I thought it might be a good thing, but since I've been horrified by the way it has been misused by the big media boys, and the way some (but not all, fortunately) courts have acepted ridiculous and completely unreal figures for actual damage. That meant I was far more careful when I saw SOPA. Of course it was unlikely to affect me directly, but ....
Part of the problem is the ridiculous extensions of copyright and the attempts of companies to eradicate "fair use". To make matters worse, some companies refuse to sell some of their product. Whatever happened to things like "The internet makes production so cheap" they said the same thing about CDs and DVDs before that "that nothing will ever go out of print and you can get anything you want."?
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
March 9, 2012 at 10:27 am
Stefan Krzywicki (3/9/2012)
Part of the problem is the ridiculous extensions of copyright and the attempts of companies to eradicate "fair use". To make matters worse, some companies refuse to sell some of their product. Whatever happened to things like "The internet makes production so cheap" they said the same thing about CDs and DVDs before that "that nothing will ever go out of print and you can get anything you want."?
I agree on copyright. I would like to go back to the 14+14 the US started with. That's plenty of time, IMHO, for an artist to make money. If you haven't by then, let someone else build on the work.
In terms of sales, that's free enterprise. No company should be forced to sell a product. Support it and be responsible, yes, but sell, no. Companies tend to collude, whether actually or just an internal decision, but they tend to sell at the highest price they can. Look at tablets. The iPad is arguable overpriced, but less capable products on Android still sold for similar prices. Those companies didn't want to sell for less. Why would they? If they can get $500 for a tablet, why bother?
However there are companies, like Amazon, that will try things like the $200 Fire tablet.
March 9, 2012 at 10:40 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/9/2012)
The iPad is arguable overpriced, but less capable products on Android still sold for similar prices. Those companies didn't want to sell for less. Why would they? If they can get $500 for a tablet, why bother?
However there are companies, like Amazon, that will try things like the $200 Fire tablet.
I'm not sure the iPad's particularly overpriced considering the spec (well, the base model anyway, the higher storage versions are a rip off compared to the price of a bit more flash memory)
There are strong rumours that the Kindle Fire is selling below cost to get market share/associated revenue from e-books.
The problem other tablet vendors have had is Apple's dominance, scale and buying power mean that they can't really undercut them easily without selling at a loss.
I'm in two minds whether to get a new iPad or hang on and hope WOA tablets don't take too long to arrive. iDevices tend to have very strong resale value (especially if you sell them before the next version gets announced), so could always get one, then sell it on if Win 8 tablets suit me better when they arrive.
March 9, 2012 at 10:53 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/9/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/9/2012)
Part of the problem is the ridiculous extensions of copyright and the attempts of companies to eradicate "fair use". To make matters worse, some companies refuse to sell some of their product. Whatever happened to things like "The internet makes production so cheap" they said the same thing about CDs and DVDs before that "that nothing will ever go out of print and you can get anything you want."?
I agree on copyright. I would like to go back to the 14+14 the US started with. That's plenty of time, IMHO, for an artist to make money. If you haven't by then, let someone else build on the work.
In terms of sales, that's free enterprise. No company should be forced to sell a product. Support it and be responsible, yes, but sell, no. Companies tend to collude, whether actually or just an internal decision, but they tend to sell at the highest price they can. Look at tablets. The iPad is arguable overpriced, but less capable products on Android still sold for similar prices. Those companies didn't want to sell for less. Why would they? If they can get $500 for a tablet, why bother?
However there are companies, like Amazon, that will try things like the $200 Fire tablet.
Competition works fine when it comes to commodities, but when you're talking about movies or music, who does it server to keep a work locked up? It hurts the artist and the consumer and creates ill will for the company. It is even worse when the original artist is dead and corporations keep works locked up. Making these things available on the internet is so cheap it is practically free, but we still see older works kept off the market or international artists kept out of local markets.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
March 9, 2012 at 1:51 pm
Stefan Krzywicki (3/9/2012)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/9/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/9/2012)
Part of the problem is the ridiculous extensions of copyright and the attempts of companies to eradicate "fair use". To make matters worse, some companies refuse to sell some of their product. Whatever happened to things like "The internet makes production so cheap" they said the same thing about CDs and DVDs before that "that nothing will ever go out of print and you can get anything you want."?
I agree on copyright. I would like to go back to the 14+14 the US started with. That's plenty of time, IMHO, for an artist to make money. If you haven't by then, let someone else build on the work.
In terms of sales, that's free enterprise. No company should be forced to sell a product. Support it and be responsible, yes, but sell, no. Companies tend to collude, whether actually or just an internal decision, but they tend to sell at the highest price they can. Look at tablets. The iPad is arguable overpriced, but less capable products on Android still sold for similar prices. Those companies didn't want to sell for less. Why would they? If they can get $500 for a tablet, why bother?
However there are companies, like Amazon, that will try things like the $200 Fire tablet.
Competition works fine when it comes to commodities, but when you're talking about movies or music, who does it server to keep a work locked up? It hurts the artist and the consumer and creates ill will for the company. It is even worse when the original artist is dead and corporations keep works locked up. Making these things available on the internet is so cheap it is practically free, but we still see older works kept off the market or international artists kept out of local markets.
In some jurisdictions there is a rule that if a patent is neither exploited by the holder or offered for use by others on reasonable terms (whatever that may mean) is ceases to have force. I think we would do extremely well to have an equivalent rule for copyright (and have the rule extended in all jurisdictions both for patent and for copyright).
Tom
March 9, 2012 at 3:00 pm
L' Eomot Inversé (3/9/2012)
In some jurisdictions there is a rule that if a patent is neither exploited by the holder or offered for use by others on reasonable terms (whatever that may mean) is ceases to have force. I think we would do extremely well to have an equivalent rule for copyright (and have the rule extended in all jurisdictions both for patent and for copyright).
That's a good idea, one that would certainly help
March 9, 2012 at 3:03 pm
HowardW (3/9/2012)
The problem other tablet vendors have had is Apple's dominance, scale and buying power mean that they can't really undercut them easily without selling at a loss.
Wait, Samsung, Toshiba, and Motorola, hardware companies, can't exceed Apple's buying power?
Perhaps, but I think more likely they wanted to cash in on the $$ Apple was making. They could have made an attempt to sell $100, $200 less, or spec'd something slightly different. Add USB, external storage, lower RAM, any number of things.
Viewing 15 posts - 34,666 through 34,680 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply