So...it's not a database...meaning it is a database? Is this like the Schrodinger's Cat thing?
Yeesh, people sure are slow on the uptake today. The answer is "DUH" ;p
It's called "sarcasm". And he put it right inside the post. I can understand misinterpreting inflection over the internet, but these are goddamn words dude. They mean things and you should read them.
Then they'll cover themselves in honey and dive into a mud wrestling ring. Wait what
Which means...it's okay to steal! :D
Or...something. Hey, I'm just drawing the logical conclusion here, don't blame me.
on the other hand, you probably wouldn't have bought a TV at all since that takes forever after you factor in the retailer's checklist of questions, packaging, installation and so on. You don't have time for this, man! You gotta pee!
Trolls on Techdirt: predictable when an articles about the TSA, predictable when it's not.
Jesus, where'd all the John Lennon haters come from? I feel like I just stumbled into a meetup for "People Who Decided It's Cool To Hate The Beatles"
Then, for everyone's safety, please stay away from your local Staples.
Or are you suggesting that agreeing to not pay your employees is the business model of the future?
It's certainly not as unethical as the news guild is pretending it to be, since I'm sure the arrangement was mutually agree on...but should we really be fine with the idea of creating a culture where wanting to make money for your work is stigmatized in favor of "popularity"? Because that's where this notion is headed and the truth is, VERY few people know or understand how to leverage popularity into profit.
In fact, I'd say it's a ability which honestly has nothing to do with any other abilities. So in other words, you end up with a lot of talented people who might become popular, but still end up dropping out of the career path because they don't have the ability to make money from it. In effect punishing brilliant minds for not being brilliant at this specific unrelated thing. Talent vanishes, quality drops, and all you're left with are a bunch of egotistical hacks who are better at leveraging eyeballs into cash than they are at writing a decent article.
I don't think that analogy works here. Regardless what GM, Ford, or Chrysler know how to make, they still pay people to make it, right? And they can't ALL be interns...right? Or more aptly - would you be okay with knowing they were?
I hate having the dissenting view here, but does the Huffington Post really not have any staff writers? Are they all, entirely, unpaid? Because I can understand having a news site where the majority of your writing team is unpaid. I don't see a problem with that...as long as you *do* have a smaller team of paid writers you can rely on and who - merit wise - represent the best of the group.
But to have a publication where everyone is always unpaid no matter what? Even by mutual agreement, that feels kind of...exploitative.
At the rate things are going, it won't take long for that statement to become literal.
Truth. It always seems like it's the corporate types who say this, simply because THEIR content creators - who they own and leach money from - don't make money while independent content creators do fine. But they don't count because.
Pretty much every media in existence right now relies either exclusively or primarily on ad revenue to exist. Where do you think TV comes from, magic land? And do you honestly believe the pittance it costs to subscribe to the local paper actually covers anything besides maybe printing costs? If that?
You're looking at the world upside down my friend. Hate to break it to ya. Here, I know what will cheer you up: have a cool refreshing Coke!
Micropayments, i think, are an interesting solution. But it can't for the umbrella. Buy into a whole site is just not going to work. Even for porn it doesn't really work. It's got to be for the ornaments. That's what people like buying after all. Let the substance the customer *expects* be the loss leader and strike at the unnecessary items that the customer *wants*.
Which kind of plays back into the notion of adding value, really.
One thing to keep in mind is that the procedure isn't supposed to have prior bias. Wherever most of the money is coming from, that is where the trial should be held under this test (but there have been arguments made to the contrary which have provided exceptions, of course). But in this case, it's very clear that Sony is pulling for California specifically, and will do whatever they can to bend the data to favor that state. There's in fact nothing to suggest that donations WOULD come from California, so eying that state in particular is suspicious at best.
Property Rights, I believe. Though I'm not familiar with where that lies or how its defined in the constitution.
Just because you aren't smart enough to wrap your head around a business structure doesn't make it illegal.
Re: Re: Customizing Your Car
Yikes! Well AC, your poor post got all torn apart. Clearly Techdirt is full of car lovers. You may want to take note of that the next time you make a lazy analogy. Y'know, to keep from embarrassing yourself again.