Forget ad revenues on their own, are their subscription fees *plus* their ad revenues (however small these might be) add up to more revenue than just their ad revenues before the paywall went up? That's the real question.
I believe this blog post explains the issues of how things were and how they are changing, though clearly all that happened today was a proposal to go in this direction, no actual deal that it would go this way.
"But, in reading it, I can't help but wonder why their anger and questions are directed at Craig, rather than those who sold them as prostitutes."
It's kinda like why our gov't and some people are exulting their anger at Wikileaks for their recent disclosures rather than examining the offenses mentioned in the documents and dealing w/those who perpetrated them. Another case of shoot the messenger I guess, 'cause the problem is too big to deal with.
"It's just the same ol' song" -- Digital Underground ;)
It has always surprised me that musicians haven't been more vocal on this matter. Afterall, having their music played in an establishment enables it to be discovered by potential buyers of their music or attendees of their concerts. It's not like musicians are getting rich from this aspect of their income (certainly not those who haven't written a hit song ;).
I can't remember how many times I have approached the bar tender or the maitre d at an establishment and asked the name of the song or artist that was playing, then went home and bought the album or song. Why this isn't seen as a simple marketing channel that s/b encouraged not taxed, is beyond me.
The issue of how things change when aggregated is certainly on display in this matter, but it's also on display in other privacy centric issues. Daniel Sokolove's paper "'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy" (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565), certainly draws this out as one of the problems in his taxonomy of privacy.
In an article penned by Kashmir Hill titled "Confessions of an Online Stalker" (http://www.assemblyjournal.com/2010/07/confessions-of-an-online-stalker/), we see just how murky the waters get as one crosses the line fm finding out a couple of items about a person, to creating a dosier on them outlining their life and background and all sorts of things they would never want compiled in one place.
So aggregation as a tenet of privacy needs to be more directly discussed and explored to resolve the sorts of issues raised by this ruling. As the court appears to have suggested, it's the fact that the GPS surveillance was constant which made the FBI's actions an issue. In other words, the aggregation of many consecutive moments. This is equally troublesome when companies or governments begin aggregating info about us fm various databases where none of the intended uses had ever been for their data to be used in this manner.
Thorny issues indeed and I'm not sure that our elected officials or courts are prepared to handle these nuances, or that even if they try, policing these will be possible.
Just found the "official" TSA response on these disclosures and they claim on their blog that "TSA has not, will not and the machines cannot store images of passengers at airports." Here's the link to their post: http://blog.tsa.gov/2010/08/tsa-response-to-feds-admit-storing.html
JMG, being informed doesn't seem to help since this exploit is so prevalent for all iOS devices. Same with credit card exploits. Knowing there are scammers doesn't help matters as they're pretty good at hiding their tracks by choosing exploits that not obvious, or attacking weak points in the chain (ie. merchant who has not properly configured and secured their servers w/latest updates).
as always, mike nails it. google's novelty was not inherently in search but in their results sorting algorithm. prior to google the other search engines also had sorting algorithms which were clearly less than optimal. google's sorting algorithm is constantly being optimized but has resulted in better results than what was previously available, and one could argue in what is currently available as well.
the very idea that search engines have to have sorting algorithms immediately suggests that a decision has to be made about the order in which results will be presented. i actually don't understand what the term "search neutrality" is supposed to mean? neutrality in the sorting algorithm? that would make no sense. the ability for us to be able to have access to other search engines? we have that already (and yes, the others are kind of lacking).
mike, best to ignore the faux debate, any momentum it gathers will fall apart when the question of "what would you suggest Google do?" comes to them ;)
Probably why the JooJoo made a lot of sense as primarily a Web-based device (all infighting aside of course). Not sure why they didn't do something cool like support Adobe Air and Web to provide an iPad-like experience but w/more openness and support for the current model.
while i'm saddened to suggest that we take it out on kentucky residents, since they have the power to vote these judges and governors in and out of office, perhaps it s/b in their hands to help the judge think this through a bit more. given this state of affairs and the power this judge and governor have decided to exact on the net, if all web sites prevented users fm a kentucky ip address to view any of their pages, that might help these official better align their decision with the rest of our country's. to say that this is an abuse of power is an understatement, but there are simple remedies to bring order back to this chaos they're inflicting. don't forget, the net always routes around points of failure ;)
On the post: Wait, Wasn't A Paywall Supposed To Boost Ad Revenue?
Nevermind ad revs
On the post: Google And Verizon Announce... Um... Something That Appears To Mean Nothing
Public Knowledge blog post
Here's blog post came out this morning:
http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/why-fccs-net-neutrality-negotiations-failed-a
On the post: Media Campaign Against Craigslist Continues, As WaPo Writes Article About Its Own Anti-Craigslist Advertiser
It's kinda like why our gov't and some people are exulting their anger at Wikileaks for their recent disclosures rather than examining the offenses mentioned in the documents and dealing w/those who perpetrated them. Another case of shoot the messenger I guess, 'cause the problem is too big to deal with.
"It's just the same ol' song" -- Digital Underground ;)
On the post: A Day In The Life Of Legalized Extortion: How The BMI Shakedown Works
Establishments as discovery engines
I can't remember how many times I have approached the bar tender or the maitre d at an establishment and asked the name of the song or artist that was playing, then went home and bought the album or song. Why this isn't seen as a simple marketing channel that s/b encouraged not taxed, is beyond me.
On the post: Appeals Court Rules Against Long Term Warrantless GPS Tracking Of Suspect; Sets Up Inevitable Supreme Court Case
Aggregation needs its own review
In an article penned by Kashmir Hill titled "Confessions of an Online Stalker" (http://www.assemblyjournal.com/2010/07/confessions-of-an-online-stalker/), we see just how murky the waters get as one crosses the line fm finding out a couple of items about a person, to creating a dosier on them outlining their life and background and all sorts of things they would never want compiled in one place.
So aggregation as a tenet of privacy needs to be more directly discussed and explored to resolve the sorts of issues raised by this ruling. As the court appears to have suggested, it's the fact that the GPS surveillance was constant which made the FBI's actions an issue. In other words, the aggregation of many consecutive moments. This is equally troublesome when companies or governments begin aggregating info about us fm various databases where none of the intended uses had ever been for their data to be used in this manner.
Thorny issues indeed and I'm not sure that our elected officials or courts are prepared to handle these nuances, or that even if they try, policing these will be possible.
On the post: And, Of Course, Gov't Agencies Recorded And Stored Body Scan Images
TSA claims their machines can't store images
On the post: Ad Scammers Getting Harder To Spot
Re: Ads aren't the problem
On the post: A Recommendation Is Not The Same As Corruption
the very idea that search engines have to have sorting algorithms immediately suggests that a decision has to be made about the order in which results will be presented. i actually don't understand what the term "search neutrality" is supposed to mean? neutrality in the sorting algorithm? that would make no sense. the ability for us to be able to have access to other search engines? we have that already (and yes, the others are kind of lacking).
mike, best to ignore the faux debate, any momentum it gathers will fall apart when the question of "what would you suggest Google do?" comes to them ;)
On the post: People Start Noticing That The Web Competes With iPad Apps
JooJoo
On the post: Judge Allows Kentucky To Seize Domain Names
Boycott Kentucky residents ;)
On the post: Would You Like Some Social Networking With That Network Switch?
Not so hard to discern
http://blog.broadbandmechanics.com/2007/03/why-did-cisco-buy-tribe-and-five-across
Next >>