"It's difficult to think of a request that is more out of touch with what is happening in the world today."
Enough with this techie-elitist crap. The man is giving a speech and he requested that folks not tweet, stream or publish anything during his session. End of story.
You are not entitled to do whatever you want, wherever you want. And you sound like a whining child who just got their toy taken away.
So just because I can handle a heroine buzz well, it should be legalized? I mean, come on, I can handle my high, why can't you handle yours. You're clearly ruining my good time.
The law/rule isn't for the people who can handle it, clearly, it's for the people who can't. Just use some god-given logic and you might actually arrive at the right answer.
"And while that might not seem fair, as FactCheck points out, the idea behind this is that we actually trust the voters to figure things out"
Imagine how dumb the average person is - now statistically, 50% of the people have to be dumber than that. Scary huh - kind of makes you wonder why people follow/endorse the garbage quoted above. Our political climate is flooded with innuendo and meaningless posturing, all fueled by 24/7 "gotcha" media coverage. It's out of control, and no amount of normal-people-figuring-things-out is going to stop it.
The point of /b/ is to have no point. And Mike, who's to say a DDoS attack had no real effect? They got you to write about it, didn't they? They got a lot of folks to cover it:
Just because folks like yourself fail to quantify its effects in a nice paragraphs post the morning after, doesn't mean it was worthless, or all for nothing.
I drive out to Worcester every now and then to play disc golf. Trust me, no one is throwing down $14.95/month for this. Drive through Worcester, and you'll know why.
I disagree with a majority of this post. Email is the lifeblood of the company I work at, and more often than not, people CC everyone and their brother because "everyone" needs to be kept in the loop, on both the client and vendor side. Some folks will follow up on a point that was brought up about five emails back, and that sets this group in one direction and that group in another direction and it's an utter mess.
Believe it or not, there is a MASSIVE push where I work to move AWAY from email and all electronic forms of communication, because 9 times out of 10 you will get way more information over the phone from the client, or in person from an Engineer, than can be requested in an email.
People think different on the phone - they're on their toes, they speak off the cuff, and generally convey in a different stream of consciousness than is functionally possible via electronic form. You may need to explain something to somebody that is complex enough to take 10 paragraphs, but why do that when you can just explain it in an entirely more human fashion than via email or IM.
Moreover, the following has me scratching my head:
"For all the hue and cry about becoming an "always on" society, we’re actually moving away from the demand that everyone be available immediately."
Is that why 90% of the folks you see on the subway, in a taxi, driving a car, walking, waiting for a bus are on fiddling with their Blackberry/iPhone/Android checking email/sending texts/you name it? I just don't buy the fact that we are in the INFORMATION age, yet somehow LESS information is being passed amongst us with regards to communication. Just don't buy it, unless I'm missing something.
Sure they could give the movie to fans! They could give a plush doll away with the movies, and a slush puppy and free attachable claws! They could do lots of things that would please their fans to no end, but would it result in dramatically better returns?
Probably. People love free stuff. As you mentioned, they're selling an image, so I don't see how handing out free gifts on admission or purchase of the DVD would wind up hurting them. If anything, they'd be helping themselves out by furthering their brand through what in essence is advertising:
That said, the increase cannot be necessarily attributed entirely to the social media campaign, since a coupon campaign for the body wash was also running at the same time.
I do know the last time I watched a funny YouTube video, however, I cannot recall the last time I clipped and turned in a coupon. To use an antiquated term, I'd say web 2.0 was responsible for this.
ID is a political spin-off off creationism, that tries to use science to deduce the existence of God. At its core, it's a bunch of wannabe scientists (but really religious fanatics in lab coats) working on what basically parallels to alchemy in the modern age.
It's lazy scientists like this who perplexingly look at the human eye and deduce that it's complexity could only be arrived at via an intelligent designer. This amounts to basically throwing your hands in the air saying "Screw it, I can't figure it out, someone else must have done this....God!"
Thank the FSM that the foundation of modern science was not built on the laughable concept of ID.
OK, back to technology!! Sorry, religious talks are up my alley. I spent 8 years in strict Catholic schooling, and these people are filled to the teeth with nonsense and naiveté.
"Where it gets tricky is that many states, such as California, now take DNA from anyone accused of a felony, and keep that DNA -- even if they're never convicted. "
Considering the entire Justice Dept. is flawed (OJ Simpson anybody?), I don't mind keeping DNA on record for those who haven't been convicted. Just because you weren't convicted, doesn't mean you're innocent.
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
Enough with this techie-elitist crap. The man is giving a speech and he requested that folks not tweet, stream or publish anything during his session. End of story.
You are not entitled to do whatever you want, wherever you want. And you sound like a whining child who just got their toy taken away.
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
Re: Re: Common Courtesy
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
Re: Re:
So just because I can handle a heroine buzz well, it should be legalized? I mean, come on, I can handle my high, why can't you handle yours. You're clearly ruining my good time.
The law/rule isn't for the people who can handle it, clearly, it's for the people who can't. Just use some god-given logic and you might actually arrive at the right answer.
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
On the post: UK Politician Tossed Out Of Parliament For Lying About Opponent During Election
Imagine how dumb the average person is - now statistically, 50% of the people have to be dumber than that. Scary huh - kind of makes you wonder why people follow/endorse the garbage quoted above. Our political climate is flooded with innuendo and meaningless posturing, all fueled by 24/7 "gotcha" media coverage. It's out of control, and no amount of normal-people-figuring-things-out is going to stop it.
On the post: Forget Information Overload: What If The Real Problem Is Information Underload
disagree
On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2369359,00.asp
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/19/riaa-at tack/
http://pandalabs.pandasecurity.com/4chan-users-organize-ddos-against-mpaa/
Just because folks like yourself fail to quantify its effects in a nice paragraphs post the morning after, doesn't mean it was worthless, or all for nothing.
On the post: NY Times Tests A Paywall With A Regional Paper
On the post: Rolling Stone Offers 'A Big Fat Thanks' To The RIAA For Screwing Up Music Online [Updated]
Tea pot calling the kettle black...
Way to really stick it to them Rolling Stone...only took a decade?
Both institutions are pointless caricatures of themselves.
On the post: Phone Calls Are For Old People? Just Not Efficient Enough
Believe it or not, there is a MASSIVE push where I work to move AWAY from email and all electronic forms of communication, because 9 times out of 10 you will get way more information over the phone from the client, or in person from an Engineer, than can be requested in an email.
People think different on the phone - they're on their toes, they speak off the cuff, and generally convey in a different stream of consciousness than is functionally possible via electronic form. You may need to explain something to somebody that is complex enough to take 10 paragraphs, but why do that when you can just explain it in an entirely more human fashion than via email or IM.
Moreover, the following has me scratching my head:
"For all the hue and cry about becoming an "always on" society, we’re actually moving away from the demand that everyone be available immediately."
Is that why 90% of the folks you see on the subway, in a taxi, driving a car, walking, waiting for a bus are on fiddling with their Blackberry/iPhone/Android checking email/sending texts/you name it? I just don't buy the fact that we are in the INFORMATION age, yet somehow LESS information is being passed amongst us with regards to communication. Just don't buy it, unless I'm missing something.
On the post: Wishful Thinking: Hollywood Believes Next Generation Of Kids Will Pay For Content
Re: I think they're right.
On the post: Content Leaks: Call The Lawyers, Or Talk To Fans Honestly?
Re:
Probably. People love free stuff. As you mentioned, they're selling an image, so I don't see how handing out free gifts on admission or purchase of the DVD would wind up hurting them. If anything, they'd be helping themselves out by furthering their brand through what in essence is advertising:
http://techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1028568252.shtml
This kind of thinking seemed to help out Old Spice:
http://techdirt.com/articles/20100728/17372910400.shtml
And Mike fairly points out the following as well:
That said, the increase cannot be necessarily attributed entirely to the social media campaign, since a coupon campaign for the body wash was also running at the same time.
I do know the last time I watched a funny YouTube video, however, I cannot recall the last time I clipped and turned in a coupon. To use an antiquated term, I'd say web 2.0 was responsible for this.
On the post: ASCAP Boss Refuses To Debate Lessig; Claims That It's An Attempt To 'Silence' ASCAP
Re: Re: Re: Typical
It's lazy scientists like this who perplexingly look at the human eye and deduce that it's complexity could only be arrived at via an intelligent designer. This amounts to basically throwing your hands in the air saying "Screw it, I can't figure it out, someone else must have done this....God!"
Thank the FSM that the foundation of modern science was not built on the laughable concept of ID.
May pesto be upon him: http://www.venganza.org/
OK, back to technology!! Sorry, religious talks are up my alley. I spent 8 years in strict Catholic schooling, and these people are filled to the teeth with nonsense and naiveté.
On the post: Funny How All The Senators Supporting Anti-FCC Bill, Have Raised Lots Of Money From AT&T
On the post: Court Explores Constitutionality Of DNA Sampling On Anyone Arrested On Felony Charges
Re: Hmm...
"DNA ostensibly comes from living or once living matter. At its most basic, it's a living extension of a person. Fingerprints are not."
What?
On the post: Court Explores Constitutionality Of DNA Sampling On Anyone Arrested On Felony Charges
Go for it.
On the post: Court Explores Constitutionality Of DNA Sampling On Anyone Arrested On Felony Charges
Considering the entire Justice Dept. is flawed (OJ Simpson anybody?), I don't mind keeping DNA on record for those who haven't been convicted. Just because you weren't convicted, doesn't mean you're innocent.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
On the post: With The Recording Industry In Free Fall, Why Are RIAA Bosses Getting Raises?
You already know this
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/02/aig-execs-may-get-pay-rai_n_482970.html
On the post: Musician/Media Professor Explains Why Teenager Was Right In Debate With Composer
Re: Re:
"But they're not taking the hit. That's the point. It's just that their business model options change, mostly for the better."
Right, so explain again how the composer is this scenario isn't the middle man?
On the post: Musician/Media Professor Explains Why Teenager Was Right In Debate With Composer
I take it you didn't read the article of the composer, which is what this whole thread was about.
"No one is forcing the creator to create. They can contribute elsewhere in the economy and find another job."
You clearly are a very cold, calculated individual with no sense of the arts. Nice chatting!
Next >>