The $750 projector in my basement is just as good as any movie theatre. I can't imagine leaving the house to see a movie when there's plenty of live entertainment.
Their thinking is they're hurting Netflix because Netflix can't get a theatrical return on the film they paid millions for, but all it's really doing is pointing out how controlling and short-sighted the major theatre chains are.
Who cares who owns movie theatres when the companies that own the movie studios also own all the television and cable channels.
But allowing the studios to own the theatres is a bad idea. It would make it impossible for non-studio movies to get shown. As it is, the contracts they put theatre owners under to show digital films still gives them lots of control over the theatres.
They're relying on exclusivity rather than trying to make theatre-going a special event that's worth getting out of the house and spending money on. I guess exclusivity is easier.
yep, the major theatre chains and MPAA Hollywood have always colluded to maintain control of the film distribution chain.
This time it will bite them, although "Beasts of No Nation" doesn't sound like something that will get a massive audience anyway, so they're not losing much in revenue.
Privacy is probably going to be one of the biggest issues we'll have with self-driving cars, esp. if we move to more of a rental instead of ownership model.
If you look at the technology on these cars, they're doing a great job of observing their surroundings and reacting accordingly. There's no need to change roads to suit them.
It's time we shut down the government for facilitating copyright infringement on a massive, nationwide scale. They even provide a search index to make it easy to find and obtain copyrighted material.
Self-driving cars have the potential to greatly reduce accidents, injuries, and fatalities. Auto accidents are currently the leading cause of accidental death in the U.S. There is a lot of room to improve those statistics and self-driving cars are the way to do it.
All of these people screaming "I won't let a computer drive me" need to get over it. Cars are already filled with computers and they're safer than they've ever been. Self-driving cars will never become roadworthy unless they're proven to be substantially safer than human drivers. It has nothing to do with laziness. It's about saving lives.
Thankfully that's not the case. Self-driving cars do not need the internet to operate. They observe their surroundings and react on their own independently.
Re:
My guess nothing since there aren't any.
Re: Re:
The $750 projector in my basement is just as good as any movie theatre. I can't imagine leaving the house to see a movie when there's plenty of live entertainment.
Re:
Their thinking is they're hurting Netflix because Netflix can't get a theatrical return on the film they paid millions for, but all it's really doing is pointing out how controlling and short-sighted the major theatre chains are.
Re: Looking back to 1948
Who cares who owns movie theatres when the companies that own the movie studios also own all the television and cable channels.
But allowing the studios to own the theatres is a bad idea. It would make it impossible for non-studio movies to get shown. As it is, the contracts they put theatre owners under to show digital films still gives them lots of control over the theatres.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Are policies on re-releases changing too?
However, if they colluded to block Netflix, there could be some legal action taken.
Re: Are policies on re-releases changing too?
They're relying on exclusivity rather than trying to make theatre-going a special event that's worth getting out of the house and spending money on. I guess exclusivity is easier.
Re:
yep, the major theatre chains and MPAA Hollywood have always colluded to maintain control of the film distribution chain.
This time it will bite them, although "Beasts of No Nation" doesn't sound like something that will get a massive audience anyway, so they're not losing much in revenue.
Re: Park those frickin self-driving cars
If you'd look at the technology, the reason people are doing it is to save lives, not so people can text while they're driving.
Go search what's the leading cause of accidental death.
Re: Re: Re:
not hare-brained, but far less practical and efficient as moving vehicles.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Privacy is probably going to be one of the biggest issues we'll have with self-driving cars, esp. if we move to more of a rental instead of ownership model.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's completely impractical to make changes to our infrastructure to accommodate a technology that isn't commonplace.
Luckily our current road system is already highly organized and planned out logically so that we can program vehicles to drive on them.
Once self-driving cars are everywhere though, it will be easy to restructure things for their benefit (and improved safety).
Re: Re: Re:
If you look at the technology on these cars, they're doing a great job of observing their surroundings and reacting accordingly. There's no need to change roads to suit them.
Re: Re:
It's time we shut down the government for facilitating copyright infringement on a massive, nationwide scale. They even provide a search index to make it easy to find and obtain copyrighted material.
Re: Hacking cars
The CEO is wrong and self-driving cars do not need the internet.
Re:
nobody is proposing that. This CEO is clueless about the technology.
Re:
Self-driving cars have the potential to greatly reduce accidents, injuries, and fatalities. Auto accidents are currently the leading cause of accidental death in the U.S. There is a lot of room to improve those statistics and self-driving cars are the way to do it.
All of these people screaming "I won't let a computer drive me" need to get over it. Cars are already filled with computers and they're safer than they've ever been. Self-driving cars will never become roadworthy unless they're proven to be substantially safer than human drivers. It has nothing to do with laziness. It's about saving lives.
Re:
Thankfully that's not the case. Self-driving cars do not need the internet to operate. They observe their surroundings and react on their own independently.
Re:
um... the laws have rarely applied to the rich and powerful. It's rare that they get busted and fluke if they get punished.
Re: Re:
So you're saying everyone that visits this website is a pirate except you? O, high and mighty?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, obviously there would be no infringement at all without copyright. The ethics of infringement depend on the ethics of copyright itself.