gilroy0 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (26) comment rss

  • On the post: Newspaper Edits Politicians Out Of Bill Signing Photograph; Doesn't Get Why People Think That's Bad

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 21 May, 2010 @ 04:23am

    Re: Re: Re:

    the other choice was no photo at all. And that other choice was the right one.

  • On the post: Should IT Be Run As A Business?

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 21 Jan, 2010 @ 08:58pm

    IT is infrastructure

    and should be handled by the facilities department, just like lights or HVAC.

  • On the post: Once Again, Music Licensing Harms The DVD Release Of A Classic TV Show: The State Goes Generic

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2009 @ 07:54pm

    In my own small world, the greatest such crime was the release of -The Greatest American Hero-, specifically the episode "Operation: Spoilsport". The plot -absolutely- hinged on Ralph continually hearing "Eve of Destruction"... but the DVD release substituted generic music. I can't even watch the show (any ep) anymore.

  • On the post: It Ain't The Link, It's What You Do With The Traffic

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2009 @ 06:24pm

    I'll chime in and agree. I found this place via a random link at -- I think -- Ezra Klein's blog, and found it interesting and informative, and have been coming back several times a day since.

  • On the post: Recap The Law: Getting Public Legal Data Back To The Public

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2009 @ 04:28am

    No, it's not like that at all.

    no different from standing in Starbucks and telling each person who orders a coffee not to pay, and giving them a bus ride to Mickey Ds.
    No, it's more like someone putting a coupon in the phone book near the "fast food" section. You only see it when you're looking for it, it describes an alternative service, and all of this takes place in your

  • On the post: Explaining Why 'If We Charge, People Will Pay' Thinking Is Misguided

    gilroy0 ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2009 @ 01:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    And you can go on any golf course and see two dozen guys playing with the same gear Tiger uses, but it doesn't help them break 100.
    Yep. Because Tiger Woods adds value (if you think that golfing has value... I don't but that's not important here). Likewise, if there existed some professional version of coins-in-a-jar that was truly demonstrably better than the one used, that photographer could charge more. But "good enough" was in fact good enough, and the magazine didn't see enough extra value in getting a prime art shot. So they didn't. Basically, it's the way the market is supposed to work. Commoditized things end up being cheaper because anyone can produce them. Stock photos, by dint of being "stock", are pretty commoditized. A specialty photo -- like, say, a hand-crafted oak desk -- is rarer and can command a higher price. But if you don't want or need the uniqueness, you can settle for an Ikea desk for a lot less money. Professionals don't like amateurs using the Net because they make it clear that for many purposes -- but not all purposes -- the world can get by with a lower-quality, lower-price picture. They see the flood of amateur pics as "contaminating" their market. But really, they're just expanding it.