"You can't play online without the latest firmware buddy."
Thanks for correcting me. From what I've read (incorrectly obviously) is that you'd no longer be able to update certain DRM related features, including the ability to play the latest blu-ray discs.
Still, my question remains. In the old days I'd buy a static product. When some new feature would come out, I'd have to buy an entirely new piece of electronics to get it. Now we're getting updates for free. Is it worth getting those updates for free if occasionally we have to give up other features?
And we're not talking about a huge feature that nearly everyone uses such as the ability to play blu-ray discs. The vast majority of PS3 users never installed Linux.
"The only way to avoid that is not to upgrade, but that will also greatly limit what you can do with your PS3"
It will not limit what you can presently do with the PS3. It can limit what you can do in the future.
In the old days, when you bought electronics, you'd get exactly what you paid for now and forever. Now electronics can be updated to do new things, offer new services, and play new and different content.
To me the mistake Sony made was allowing the installation of Linux in the first place. It made no business sense, i.e., it doesn't earn them any money and they actually lose money because they're selling consoles that will not play any games. I knew it was only a matter of time before someone figured out how to use this to bypass DRM. Why didn't Sony figure that out?
I guess my point is that if you want new features to be added to your electronics completely for free, is it too much to ask that sometimes unprofitable features can be removed?
I haven't completely thought this out yet. I'm not saying either side is right, I'm just putting the question out there.
"This results in an instructor standing in front of the class talking too fast so the students can transfer the contents of the professor's notebook to their notebook"
I had a professor in law school who went so fast she would write on the chalk board with her right hand and erase with her left.
As far as I can tell, the professor from the Tuck School of Business thinks the sole advantage Harvard or Stanford offers to students is secrecy. I'm trying to figure out how secrecy constitutes value to students.
I can certainly understand why you'd want to forget.
I'm guessing that somewhere there's a group of friends who play a drinking game to Smallville, where whenever there's female cleavage the guys drink and whenever there's a guy not wearing a shirt the girls drink. They'd be pretty drunk by the end, that's for sure.
Yeah, I said I liked the first four seasons. I continued watching for a few seasons more, because as Dark Helmet pointed out, the babes are smoking hot. But eventually it just got so stupid that even smoking hot babes could not make it watchable.
10th fricken season?! Who the frick is still watching that show? Sure, the first four seasons had a certain charm. Watching Clark get through high school. But he's now firmly in his mid twenties and he still can't fly?!
The no flight/no tights rules made sense when he was in high school. But they make no sense now.
I've said it before, copyrights and patents are government granted monopolies. When governments are forced to expand these monopolies based upon unelected foreign pressures, the entire purpose of granting the monopolies becomes perverted. It's no longer about giving an incentive to create, it's about protecting the cashcows of international corporations.
" guess you're only willing to give it away because it's worthless"
So you're saying that if I price my shit at 100 bucks an ounce, suddenly it will not be worthless? To put it another way, that concepts such as value and worth are set by the mere price put on the object or service?
Re: I can't speak for this one specifically, but...
"It sucks to see your work implemented under someone elses name"
Yes, competition sucks. But it's a fact when operating a business in a free market. Well, it used to be until the government granted monopolies associated with copyrights and patents starting getting out of control.
For example, McDonalds took the fast food approach used by others, e.g., White Castle has been around since 1921, competed with those other restaurants, and built an empire on that competition. Nowadays the fast food business model would have been patented and McDonalds would not have been able to even attempt to compete. They would have been sued.
Re: I can't speak for this one specifically, but...
"*IF* NBC used this guys business plan/model and developed Hulu from it then he has a right to recover his expenses."
No he does not. Putting aside business model patents, because there is no allegation that Errol Hula had any such patents, there is nothing under the law requiring payment for using someone else's business model.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
Re: Re:
Thanks for correcting me. From what I've read (incorrectly obviously) is that you'd no longer be able to update certain DRM related features, including the ability to play the latest blu-ray discs.
Still, my question remains. In the old days I'd buy a static product. When some new feature would come out, I'd have to buy an entirely new piece of electronics to get it. Now we're getting updates for free. Is it worth getting those updates for free if occasionally we have to give up other features?
And we're not talking about a huge feature that nearly everyone uses such as the ability to play blu-ray discs. The vast majority of PS3 users never installed Linux.
On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought
It will not limit what you can presently do with the PS3. It can limit what you can do in the future.
In the old days, when you bought electronics, you'd get exactly what you paid for now and forever. Now electronics can be updated to do new things, offer new services, and play new and different content.
To me the mistake Sony made was allowing the installation of Linux in the first place. It made no business sense, i.e., it doesn't earn them any money and they actually lose money because they're selling consoles that will not play any games. I knew it was only a matter of time before someone figured out how to use this to bypass DRM. Why didn't Sony figure that out?
I guess my point is that if you want new features to be added to your electronics completely for free, is it too much to ask that sometimes unprofitable features can be removed?
I haven't completely thought this out yet. I'm not saying either side is right, I'm just putting the question out there.
On the post: Paywall/Open Debate Applied To University Education As Well
I had a professor in law school who went so fast she would write on the chalk board with her right hand and erase with her left.
On the post: Paywall/Open Debate Applied To University Education As Well
On the post: Smallville Creators Sue Warner Bros, Say They Never Got Fair Market Price For Their Work
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm guessing that somewhere there's a group of friends who play a drinking game to Smallville, where whenever there's female cleavage the guys drink and whenever there's a guy not wearing a shirt the girls drink. They'd be pretty drunk by the end, that's for sure.
On the post: Teens Face Felony Charges Over Girl Who Committed Suicide
Still, as you point out with the statutory rape charge, there is certainly something more going on than mere online bullying.
On the post: Smallville Creators Sue Warner Bros, Say They Never Got Fair Market Price For Their Work
Re: Re:
On the post: Smallville Creators Sue Warner Bros, Say They Never Got Fair Market Price For Their Work
Re: Re:
You forgot that very important part.
On the post: Smallville Creators Sue Warner Bros, Say They Never Got Fair Market Price For Their Work
The no flight/no tights rules made sense when he was in high school. But they make no sense now.
On the post: EU Keeps Pushing Canada To Make Massive Changes To IP Law, With No Concern For User Rights
Re: Re: Terminology FAIL
On the post: EU Keeps Pushing Canada To Make Massive Changes To IP Law, With No Concern For User Rights
On the post: Because NBC Could Never Have Figured Out How To Put TV Shows On The Internet By Itself...
Re:
So you're saying that if I price my shit at 100 bucks an ounce, suddenly it will not be worthless? To put it another way, that concepts such as value and worth are set by the mere price put on the object or service?
On the post: Because NBC Could Never Have Figured Out How To Put TV Shows On The Internet By Itself...
Re: Re: Re: I can't speak for this one specifically, but...
On the post: Because NBC Could Never Have Figured Out How To Put TV Shows On The Internet By Itself...
Re: I can't speak for this one specifically, but...
Yes, competition sucks. But it's a fact when operating a business in a free market. Well, it used to be until the government granted monopolies associated with copyrights and patents starting getting out of control.
For example, McDonalds took the fast food approach used by others, e.g., White Castle has been around since 1921, competed with those other restaurants, and built an empire on that competition. Nowadays the fast food business model would have been patented and McDonalds would not have been able to even attempt to compete. They would have been sued.
On the post: Because NBC Could Never Have Figured Out How To Put TV Shows On The Internet By Itself...
Re: I can't speak for this one specifically, but...
No he does not. Putting aside business model patents, because there is no allegation that Errol Hula had any such patents, there is nothing under the law requiring payment for using someone else's business model.
On the post: Are Publishers Putting Too Much Stock In The iPad, Or Are They Just Doing It Wrong?
So how long until publishers demand that Apple should block their websites on the iPad?
On the post: Fixing Class Action Lawsuits
By "all to often" you mean 99.99999999999% of the time, right?
On the post: North Face Lawyers Try To Drag South Butt Family Through The Mud
Re: Mike, don't be disingenuous
Um, there is no law against selling clothing of identical style, color, or fabric of someone else.
On the post: North Face Lawyers Try To Drag South Butt Family Through The Mud
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pay-per-view
On the post: North Face Lawyers Try To Drag South Butt Family Through The Mud
Re: Re: Pay-per-view
Next >>