A blog doesn't need a clever name
Cyberethics, Crypto, Community, Freedom, Privacy, Property, Philosophy, MP3, Online Ed, Copyright, Iran, other current topics and fun stuff
Last updated:
5/1/06; 7:45:07 AM


April 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Mar   May



Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Subscribe to "A blog doesn't need a clever name" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Didn't find what you were looking for?




-
Listed on BlogShares

E-mail this blog's author, Bruce Umbaugh:
Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

Saturday, April 29, 2006

The myth of "keeping up". Do you have a stack of books, journals, manuals, articles, API docs, and blog printouts that you think you'll get to? That you think you need to read? Now, based on past experience, what are the odds you'll get... [Creating Passionate Users]

Common problem, worthwhile explanation. Plus, several valuable ideas about steps to respond to our own information anxiety.


8:32:28 PM    comment []

Essay: The Epic of Iran. Iran's "Book of Kings" has long been used as a political weapon in the struggle between the turban and the crown. By REZA ASLAN. [NYT > Books]
6:58:08 PM    comment []

Sony screwing artists out of iTunes royalties, customers out of first-sale. Cory Doctorow:

Sony musicians including Cheap Trick and the Allman Brothers are suing the record label for screwing them out of their royalties on sales of music on iTunes and other digital music services.

At issue is whether the music sold through these services is a "license" or a "sale." Sony pays less to its artists for sales than for licensing (Sony artists reportedly earn $0.0045 for each $0.99 song sold on iTunes). Naturally, Sony claims that the songs sold on iTunes are sales and not licensing deals.

This is where it gets interesting. As Brad Templeton and others have pointed out, Sony and others have long maintained that what you get when you buy an iTune is a license, not ownership of a product. That license prohibits you from doing all kinds of otherwise lawful things, like selling your music to a used-record store, loaning it to a friend, or playing it on someone else's program.

But if Sony says that it's selling products (and therefore only liable for 4.5 cents in royalties to its artists) and not licenses, then how can it bind us, its customers, to licensing terms?

According to the suit, the record company is treating digital downloads like traditional record sales, rather than licensed music, triggering a different royalty deal.

Under that old rubrik, the record company deducts fees for the kind of extra costs they used to incur when records were pressed on vinyl, including packaging charges, restocking costs and losses due to breakage.

Link (via /.)

[Boing Boing]


6:58:01 PM    comment []

Where single-letter Google-queries point to (jm-li .... Where single-letter Google-queries point to (jm-list)
[robot wisdom weblog]
6:55:06 PM    comment []

What I Said at Columbia University.

Thanks again to Columbia University for inviting me this week to give the annual Hearst New Media Lecture. The audience was terrific and asked great questions (I don’t have a transcript of that part, sorry. What follows is the talk as I wrote it out, beginning after the various thank-yous to the folks who invited me (special thanks to Sree), though I did stray frequently from the written text. I’ll add the appropriate links as I get the time.

[Center for Citizen Media: Blog]
6:55:00 PM    comment []

News Analysis: Iran Strategy: Cold War Echo [New York Times: International News]
6:47:01 PM    comment []

I Can't Wait For My "The New Built To Spill Album Kind Of Sucks" Check!.

People often complain that they don't know what Democrats stand for. Thankfully, there is no such ambiguity regarding the Republicans. Today they again reminded the nation of the bedrock principle that their party was found upon: giving voters $100 each in an election year.

They are calling the swag "gas rebate checks," because it's supposedly to reimburse citizens for the high gasoline prices they have been subjected to over the last year. Never mind that subsidizing the purchase of gasoline will increase demand and lead to yet higher gas prices.

But there's no obligation for the recipients of these checks to actually spend the cash on fuel. In fact, as near as I can tell there is no connection whatsoever between the money and gasoline prices -- I presume that bicyclists will be getting the same amount as truckers -- except that the checks will probably have the words "Republican sponsored gas rebate" in the "memo" field.

Frankly, I think Congress is missing an opportunity for a more targeted approach. What they should do is ask each American what he or she is most unhappy about, and then label the checks accordingly. There could be "gas rebate" checks and "cable rebate" checks and "dadgum Mexicans taking our jobs" checks and "dudes kissing dudes" checks. That way, Americans will know that Republicans care exactly $100 worth about whichever issue concerns them the most.

The whole thing would seem kind of silly if the government were just giving us back the money we paid in taxes; it would like a bank touting their generosity every time you withdrew your own money. How fortunate, then, that the United States has long since exhausted its cash on hand. Now the cost of funding the program will get tacked onto our already obscene national debt, and it will be the poor saps down the chronological line that will get stuck with the bill. In other words, it's 100% completely free money!!

In fact, they should just call this the "Five Dollar Bill in the Birthday Card Preimbursement Program." Here's how it works. First, we give you $100 now. Then, after your grandchild is born, you include $5 in every card you send them on their birthday -- iIf you stop sending them cards before they turn twenty, you get to keep all the extra money! Then your grandchild joins the workforce, gets burdened with astronomical taxes, and struggles to pay down the gargantuan debt we saddled him with. It's like your adult grandchild is sending $100 back in time to you, who is then sending it forward in time to your adult grandchild's younger self. How totally awesome is that? It's pretty much exactly like The Terminator!

All in all I think the "giving voters $100 each in an election year" program this is the greatest things to come out of Washington since prohibition. It's so clever that I can't help but wonder where Republicans got the idea. Lord knows no one has ever given a Republican a bunch of "no strings attached" money in the hopes of influencing their vote.

[defective yeti]
6:46:55 PM    comment []



© Copyright 2006 Bruce Umbaugh. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 5/1/06; 7:45:17 AM.
Powered by
(-- £ Salon Bloggers & --)