it's very true that making billions of dollars doesn't mean that you are making billions of dollars, since you have all of those "expenses" like the stars and their "percentages".
Every media business has its ups and downs. Just because people are going to the theatres in droves today doesn't mean that this situation will always be so. "Free content" is killing off every media business, one at a time. You may not like what you're getting right now, but if you don't want to pay for stuff, you'll like what you get even less.
one of the movies i went to see this summer was the 25th anniversary edition of "war games". i went with a bunch of my hacker buddies even though we've all seen it like 300 times.
i think that the two extremes are proving that there are other clever business people waiting in the wings to take over for the industry when it falls flat.
more movies could be made for a lot less, and distributed for a lot less, and would therefore have to make a lot less and/or appeal to a lot fewer people in order to turn a profit.
also, with less universal appeal, maybe it wouldn't be effortless to download films like it is right now.
hard drives are so cheap, you just have multiples.
i currently have 2 file servers, each with ~2tb of live disk (3 750gb drives striped). nfs + rsync FTW on the server side and samba + xbox media center FTW on the client side.
then i either BT or news group movies or rent, rip and return from netflix.
i have lost things before, and you just go to the net and pull it down again, or get a copy from a friend.
Do you ever go to theaters to watch them again, and if so about what % of time?
i don't go to the theater to watch movies, i go to the theater to hang out with my friends or my kids. i pirate video games too, but i still play them in arcades with my friends or with my kids. i pirate music too, but still go to shows.
If any of the pirated films were not available for download, would you be inclined to go to theaters to watch them for the first time?
the availability of films online isn't what keeps me out of the theater. it's the price of the film and the risk of the quality of the film. horror movies that aren't scary are a waste of money. comedies that aren't funny are doubly so.
if a film is a safe bet (based on a book/comic i/we already like) then it is easy to get friends to go see it. i saw all 3 pirates of the caribbean films in the theater, all 3 spiderman films, all the star wars, all the lord of the rings, etc.
if it's a solid effort from a proven kid's franchise, then i feel good about taking the kids to go see it. i've seen all the shrek's with the kids, the toy stories, coraline, etc.
but tickets and everything are too expensive to take a chance on films. if you talk everyone in to seeing a stinker, it undermines your credibility when suggesting future films.
this is self defeating for the film industry. if you want to charge the prices you charge, then the films should be quality, but often, they are not. if you want to grunt out films of questionable quality, then viewing them shouldn't be financially and socially risky.
piracy is just not trying to destroy the film industry the way the film industry is trying [and failing] to destroy piracy.
i pirate most of the films i watch but i still see more movies in the theater than my friends and co-workers do. that's the ugly fact that the industry can't seem to grasp.
the same can be said for free software and microsoft. one party is doing what it does, and one party firmly believes that it has a financial interest in eliminating the other.
the monopoly angle today is not what it was in 99. in 99 MS was on trial for using it's windows monopoly to push netscape out of the market.
the biggest example was telling apple that if it didn't ship IE for the mac, it would stop making office for the mac, rendering the mac pretty much useless at that time.
things are different now, and i guess europe wants to see MS punished for it's actions from a decade ago.
interesting interpretations of the geneva conventions
my favorite: you can't engage personnel with .50 caliber machine guns. you can only use .50's on equipment according to the convention.
thankfully, helmets count as equipment.
my other favorite: you can't deliberately cause unnecessary pain and suffering. so your kills must be "clean", dispatching the enemy as quickly and painlessly as possible.
since most soldiers wear flak vests or body armor, aiming for the torso can mean that a direct hit will take hours for an enemy combatant to bleed out, or days to succumb to sepsis. this is especially true when using full metal jacketed or standard light armor piercing rounds. SLAP and some FMJ rounds can pass straight through the target rather than mushrooming inside the body the way that hollow points do.
therefore, the only humane place to shoot someone is in and unprotected area that will result in a fatality, i.e. the face.
the other translation of that requirement is the "double tap" or hitting the same target twice, as close to the same spot as possible in hopes of hitting a weak or compromised area of body armor. the idea being that hydrostatic shock will put the enemy combatant down quickly.
in close quarters, both translations are applied: i.e. two in the chest and one in the head. two in the [presumably armored] torso to halt forward advancement and buy time to line up the kill shot to the head.
bashing BPL for being a total failure is a lot of fun, but it doesn't change the fact that we need a third viable option for broadband besides cable and DSL.
the more competition in that space the better off we will all be, even if we choose to stay with cable or DSL.
thisis why muni-fiber, muni-wifi, and all those other broadband projects need to get off the ground despite whining and complaining from incumbents.
i would like to see the mobile providers step up and offer their broadband services with speeds and caps that would allow them to compete with residential providers.
of course, it will never happen, since there are really only two mobile carriers (verizon and at&t) who both have dsl and fiber businesses to protect, even though it means they could expand into regions that they do not currently have monopolies on.
If anything, this is going to drive people who would have watched the networks' legitimate online offering to bittorrent (so they can watch it on their TVs, instead of on a computer screen).
i have been using a modded xbox with xbox media center, a file server, and bit torrent to watch downloaded movies and TV shows on my TV for like 5 years.
i would use boxee or something else, but honestly, my current setup is so easy to use and has so few restrictions that the "sanctioned" versions of shows are nearly impossible to use by comparison.
1) centralize your data on a secure platform
2) use encryption and access control when granting access to the secured storage
3) if data cannot be centralized, then it must be encrypted with strong cryptographic tools.
not all devices are created equal. WPA2 is the favorite for maximum wireless security, but it is a relatively new invention, and not all wifi connected devices are new, nor are they laptops.
WPA2 is great, but support for it was not built into windows xp, so you have to install the wpa2/wps ie update or move to service pack 3. this means testing, deployment, and even training.
what about those other devices, like pdas, phones, or barcode readers, that may not include WPA2 support?
the problem isn't with the decision to use wep. the problem is with not separating the wireless network from the corporate network when wep was proven to be insecure.
i am all for watching an arm of the MAFIAA embarrass itself, but isn't this one of those rare occasions where they got it right?
bootleg disks sold on the street, or in a retail outlet, is real infringement for profit, isn't what what the *IAA's of the world are supposed to be cracking down on?
while the counterfeiters may get their copies from P2P services, i think the real crime here is in the sale of the disks for profit rather than the availability of the digital copies.
The Big Brother spin to this isn't worth much, especially considering most of us carry moderately traceable cell phones anyway.
cellphones are not mandatory. there are no laws anywhere that require you to carry one. therefore, if i don't want to be tracked i can just leave my phone at home and there is no legal concern.
Besides this particular point, many people pay to have this kind of service installed on their cars now to help prevent theft.
that is a choice. it is not legislated by the state. requiring a GPS tracker in every car means that you cannot "opt out" of the service if you have privacy concerns. mandatory tracking is bad. always has been, always will be.
also, you can review the privacy agreement for a service and choose a vendor based on their privacy policy. if no vendor's privacy policy measures up then you can either build your own solution or choose to do without the service.
One of many oppositions to this idea would be dirver privacy. Who wil maintain the data and how will it be used and, gasp, audited?
the data will be used by law enforcement to track minorities and people with low incomes. the data on whites with higher incomes will be sold to market research firms. it will then be stolen by criminal groups that are not willing to pay for it. it won't be audited at all and abused by anyone and everyone.
traffic cops will be able to stalk and harrass anyone they want to.
database errors will cause people to owe millions of dollars in mileage taxes.
How can anyone who reads this site on a semi-regular basis not think the travel data contained within a user database would be safe from abuse?
of course it will be abused, that goes without saying.
the data hasn't even been collected yet and it's already being abused. i'll bet that at this very moment there are 10 startup companies founded by MIT alums that are getting their first rounds of venture capital to develop marketing tools to profit from this data.
Nevermind the potential for data theft.
potential? you mean guaranteed certainty.
Ideas like this are simply money and power grabs by the governmental powers that be....they serve no real tax purpose that can't be maintain at a higher level in the supplu chain.
don't forget that you have a choice in the matter: you can be spied on to be protected by terrorists, or you can be spied on to save the environment.
on the right you have the police state, and on the left you have the nanny state.
this is why voting is so important: you get to choose whether you spend your life in a padded cell or in a metal cage.
I agree with Coward. It seems more cost effective to base the tax on the odometer reading. Sure a few would spin it back, but the money lost from cheating wouldn't compare to the cost of GPS units, etc....
yeah, but you can't track where people go and what they are doing if you read their odometers.
some of us are quite happy to merely use the net as a social gathering and yes we do make mistakes by opening the wrong emails, it is our nature we're human demmit. does this mean we are open season for internet bullies to spam and send out viruses that eat up our low powered pcs? oh i am so sorry the internet is the playground only for the techno savvy.
i agree totally. it's totally unfair to discriminate against someone based on their skill level.
i played a couple of flag football games in college, i don't know why i'm not allowed to play in the NFL. sure i can't run very fast and i can't throw a football very far, but i'm human demmit.
there is all this talk about "my safety" but really, if the league is too dangerous for non-professionals to play then the league and the game should be changed to let couch potatoes like me have a fair chance.
also, i completed a CPR course, i should be allowed to practice medicine as well. again, that discriminatory "safety" issue keeps coming up. i'm human demmit! i want to be a doctor like on gray's anatomy.
what about us who do not get our cookies off from seeing others in pain?
On the post: Price Ceiling For Mobile Voice Service Continues To Fall
it's dialup internet access all over again
it's funny how having multiple players in a given space leads to falling prices.
this is why the cable and landline phone companies will fight to the death to prevent competition.
On the post: If Piracy Is Destroying The Movie Business, Why Is The Box Office Surging?
Re: Movie Economics
ahh, yes, the accounting ninjitsu that makes every production "lose" money regardless of how wildly successful it is:
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/Dealart.htm
it's very true that making billions of dollars doesn't mean that you are making billions of dollars, since you have all of those "expenses" like the stars and their "percentages".
Every media business has its ups and downs. Just because people are going to the theatres in droves today doesn't mean that this situation will always be so. "Free content" is killing off every media business, one at a time. You may not like what you're getting right now, but if you don't want to pay for stuff, you'll like what you get even less.
one of the movies i went to see this summer was the 25th anniversary edition of "war games". i went with a bunch of my hacker buddies even though we've all seen it like 300 times.
also, there was a halflife inspired mini movie that was reportedly made for $500:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1UPMEmCqZo
i think that the two extremes are proving that there are other clever business people waiting in the wings to take over for the industry when it falls flat.
more movies could be made for a lot less, and distributed for a lot less, and would therefore have to make a lot less and/or appeal to a lot fewer people in order to turn a profit.
also, with less universal appeal, maybe it wouldn't be effortless to download films like it is right now.
On the post: If Piracy Is Destroying The Movie Business, Why Is The Box Office Surging?
Re: Re: Is this blog still around?
for some of us, it's more like a jihad.
On the post: If Piracy Is Destroying The Movie Business, Why Is The Box Office Surging?
Re: Re: Re: Re: piracy is winning
i currently have 2 file servers, each with ~2tb of live disk (3 750gb drives striped). nfs + rsync FTW on the server side and samba + xbox media center FTW on the client side.
then i either BT or news group movies or rent, rip and return from netflix.
i have lost things before, and you just go to the net and pull it down again, or get a copy from a friend.
On the post: If Piracy Is Destroying The Movie Business, Why Is The Box Office Surging?
Re: Re: piracy is winning
i don't go to the theater to watch movies, i go to the theater to hang out with my friends or my kids. i pirate video games too, but i still play them in arcades with my friends or with my kids. i pirate music too, but still go to shows.
If any of the pirated films were not available for download, would you be inclined to go to theaters to watch them for the first time?
the availability of films online isn't what keeps me out of the theater. it's the price of the film and the risk of the quality of the film. horror movies that aren't scary are a waste of money. comedies that aren't funny are doubly so.
if a film is a safe bet (based on a book/comic i/we already like) then it is easy to get friends to go see it. i saw all 3 pirates of the caribbean films in the theater, all 3 spiderman films, all the star wars, all the lord of the rings, etc.
if it's a solid effort from a proven kid's franchise, then i feel good about taking the kids to go see it. i've seen all the shrek's with the kids, the toy stories, coraline, etc.
but tickets and everything are too expensive to take a chance on films. if you talk everyone in to seeing a stinker, it undermines your credibility when suggesting future films.
this is self defeating for the film industry. if you want to charge the prices you charge, then the films should be quality, but often, they are not. if you want to grunt out films of questionable quality, then viewing them shouldn't be financially and socially risky.
On the post: If Piracy Is Destroying The Movie Business, Why Is The Box Office Surging?
piracy is winning
piracy is just not trying to destroy the film industry the way the film industry is trying [and failing] to destroy piracy.
i pirate most of the films i watch but i still see more movies in the theater than my friends and co-workers do. that's the ugly fact that the industry can't seem to grasp.
the same can be said for free software and microsoft. one party is doing what it does, and one party firmly believes that it has a financial interest in eliminating the other.
On the post: The Big Question: Are Violent Video Games Adequately Preparing Kids For The Apocalypse?
too much contradictory information
will the zombies be slow, like in halflife2 or move quickly, like in left4dead?
will the nuclear fallout create unintelligent, feral mutants like in the fallout series, or will people develop super powers like in comic books?
i think that real scientific inquiry could answer these questions so that we are better trained and prepared for the apocalypse.
On the post: Google, Too, Chooses Lobbying Over Competing
Re: Bad form for Google
the biggest example was telling apple that if it didn't ship IE for the mac, it would stop making office for the mac, rendering the mac pretty much useless at that time.
things are different now, and i guess europe wants to see MS punished for it's actions from a decade ago.
On the post: Time To Make Carl Malamud Head Of The Government Printing Office
Re:
it's always better to do nothing instead of risking failure.
also, the government has magical powers that turn you into a corrupt automaton so it's better to not risk exposure.
On the post: Parent Makes Gamer Son Promise To Obey Geneva Conventions In Video Game
interesting interpretations of the geneva conventions
thankfully, helmets count as equipment.
my other favorite: you can't deliberately cause unnecessary pain and suffering. so your kills must be "clean", dispatching the enemy as quickly and painlessly as possible.
since most soldiers wear flak vests or body armor, aiming for the torso can mean that a direct hit will take hours for an enemy combatant to bleed out, or days to succumb to sepsis. this is especially true when using full metal jacketed or standard light armor piercing rounds. SLAP and some FMJ rounds can pass straight through the target rather than mushrooming inside the body the way that hollow points do.
therefore, the only humane place to shoot someone is in and unprotected area that will result in a fatality, i.e. the face.
the other translation of that requirement is the "double tap" or hitting the same target twice, as close to the same spot as possible in hopes of hitting a weak or compromised area of body armor. the idea being that hydrostatic shock will put the enemy combatant down quickly.
in close quarters, both translations are applied: i.e. two in the chest and one in the head. two in the [presumably armored] torso to halt forward advancement and buy time to line up the kill shot to the head.
On the post: BPL Lives On, Again
the third pipe dream
the more competition in that space the better off we will all be, even if we choose to stay with cable or DSL.
thisis why muni-fiber, muni-wifi, and all those other broadband projects need to get off the ground despite whining and complaining from incumbents.
i would like to see the mobile providers step up and offer their broadband services with speeds and caps that would allow them to compete with residential providers.
of course, it will never happen, since there are really only two mobile carriers (verizon and at&t) who both have dsl and fiber businesses to protect, even though it means they could expand into regions that they do not currently have monopolies on.
On the post: Hollywood Shoots Itself In The Foot... Again; Removes Content From Boxee
Re: Re: Browser vs. Boxee
i have been using a modded xbox with xbox media center, a file server, and bit torrent to watch downloaded movies and TV shows on my TV for like 5 years.
i would use boxee or something else, but honestly, my current setup is so easy to use and has so few restrictions that the "sanctioned" versions of shows are nearly impossible to use by comparison.
On the post: Insider Security Attacks On The Rise, MS Says
Re: Looks like a Sales Pitch
data loss prevention is pretty simple:
1) centralize your data on a secure platform
2) use encryption and access control when granting access to the secured storage
3) if data cannot be centralized, then it must be encrypted with strong cryptographic tools.
On the post: Insider Security Attacks On The Rise, MS Says
the WEP decision
WPA2 is great, but support for it was not built into windows xp, so you have to install the wpa2/wps ie update or move to service pack 3. this means testing, deployment, and even training.
what about those other devices, like pdas, phones, or barcode readers, that may not include WPA2 support?
the problem isn't with the decision to use wep. the problem is with not separating the wireless network from the corporate network when wep was proven to be insecure.
On the post: MPAA Cheers On Totally Useless Piracy Crackdown
isn't this what they are supposed to be doing?
bootleg disks sold on the street, or in a retail outlet, is real infringement for profit, isn't what what the *IAA's of the world are supposed to be cracking down on?
while the counterfeiters may get their copies from P2P services, i think the real crime here is in the sale of the disks for profit rather than the availability of the digital copies.
On the post: Massachusetts Wants GPS Driving Tax, Too
Re: Pay as you go!
cellphones are not mandatory. there are no laws anywhere that require you to carry one. therefore, if i don't want to be tracked i can just leave my phone at home and there is no legal concern.
Besides this particular point, many people pay to have this kind of service installed on their cars now to help prevent theft.
that is a choice. it is not legislated by the state. requiring a GPS tracker in every car means that you cannot "opt out" of the service if you have privacy concerns. mandatory tracking is bad. always has been, always will be.
also, you can review the privacy agreement for a service and choose a vendor based on their privacy policy. if no vendor's privacy policy measures up then you can either build your own solution or choose to do without the service.
On the post: Massachusetts Wants GPS Driving Tax, Too
Re: Really?
the data will be used by law enforcement to track minorities and people with low incomes. the data on whites with higher incomes will be sold to market research firms. it will then be stolen by criminal groups that are not willing to pay for it. it won't be audited at all and abused by anyone and everyone.
traffic cops will be able to stalk and harrass anyone they want to.
database errors will cause people to owe millions of dollars in mileage taxes.
How can anyone who reads this site on a semi-regular basis not think the travel data contained within a user database would be safe from abuse?
of course it will be abused, that goes without saying.
the data hasn't even been collected yet and it's already being abused. i'll bet that at this very moment there are 10 startup companies founded by MIT alums that are getting their first rounds of venture capital to develop marketing tools to profit from this data.
Nevermind the potential for data theft.
potential? you mean guaranteed certainty.
Ideas like this are simply money and power grabs by the governmental powers that be....they serve no real tax purpose that can't be maintain at a higher level in the supplu chain.
don't forget that you have a choice in the matter: you can be spied on to be protected by terrorists, or you can be spied on to save the environment.
on the right you have the police state, and on the left you have the nanny state.
this is why voting is so important: you get to choose whether you spend your life in a padded cell or in a metal cage.
On the post: Massachusetts Wants GPS Driving Tax, Too
Re: Re:
yeah, but you can't track where people go and what they are doing if you read their odometers.
On the post: Copyright Lobbyists Again Demand That The US Classify Canada As Being A Piracy Hotbed
take that canada!
you are reaping the harvest that is your destruction which you have sown with your blue money and your bagged milk.
On the post: Can We Stop Asking For A New Internet?
Re: multiple nets would be best
i agree totally. it's totally unfair to discriminate against someone based on their skill level.
i played a couple of flag football games in college, i don't know why i'm not allowed to play in the NFL. sure i can't run very fast and i can't throw a football very far, but i'm human demmit.
there is all this talk about "my safety" but really, if the league is too dangerous for non-professionals to play then the league and the game should be changed to let couch potatoes like me have a fair chance.
also, i completed a CPR course, i should be allowed to practice medicine as well. again, that discriminatory "safety" issue keeps coming up. i'm human demmit! i want to be a doctor like on gray's anatomy.
what about us who do not get our cookies off from seeing others in pain?
the internet is serious business.
Next >>