You have to wonder what the executives at CBS and NBC are thinking. Shoot, even what they're thinking at ABC. On Amazon.com the first season of "Desparate Housewives" costs about $39 U.S. dollars, or about $1.69 per episode (less if you include special features in the cost). Apple charges $1.99 per low res episode that only looks good in a small window on your computer, or on an iPod screen. It's an easy bet that the anyone who buys the iTunes episode will eventually want to watch it on their TV. Even if someone breaks the DRM and makes it possible to burn the episodes to DVD the picture will be almost unviewable on a TV screen. Which means they will have to buy the DVD set for a decent picture. And if they're a real fan, they'll want the DVD for the extra features, too. That means the network gets to make money three times per episode (not counting syndication): Original airing, iPod version, DVD version.
Add to that the fact that the iTunes version lacks cost of pressing DVD's and distributing them and 1,000,000 videos have sold in 20 days, and putting episodes on iTunes seems like a no-brainer. Of course, network executives haven't always been noted for their intelligence.
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Friday, September 09, 2005
The aftermath of hurricane Katrina
It's tempting to go into a lengthy description of the events that started just before Katrina hit land and will continue into the foreseeable future. But anyone reading this now is aware of most of them. Anyone reading it in the future should have no trouble finding detailed accounts of them. So I will hold fast to my main purpose, putting my thoughts, hopes, and fears regarding the controversies surrounding the governments action, or some would say inaction, after Katrina hit land.
The whole situation was poorly handled, yet reading the Wikipedia article on the situation in New Orleans before and after Katrina hit, I don't know that anyone would have done better. Most of the problems were actually years, and maybe even decades in the making. Levies and retaining walls that should have been updated and reinforced long ago. Disaster plans that failed to accurately assess the results of a category 4 (or 5) hurricane and officials who failed to fully appreciate the number of policemen and soldiers or the number of relief workers necessary to keep order and assist victims following a disaster of such proportion. I'm glad that, after doing some quick research beyond Wikipedia, it appears to me that the delays and problems were much more likely due to poor planning and a failure to understand the likely result of Katrina hitting New Orleans than to an actual racist attitude pervading the government. But the fact remains that the majority of the victims were black, and it's not very far to leap to see a racist agenda in the handling of Katrina.
Why is it that in a time of disaster, a time when we should be pulling together more than any other, we are purposely wasting energy perpetuating racist stereotypes that we all know are not true? Why, instead of attacking the president, aren't we encouraging him to take action, and taking action ourselves? Why are we looking for reasons to hate each other almost as hard as we are trying to help the victims of Katrina? Yes, the situation was handled horribly. Yes, most of the victims were black. But in my heart of hearts I hope and pray that what I feel to be true really is. This entire horror of a rescue effort was a result of poor planning, not racism. That difference may not matter to those who died, but it is direly important for those who survived.
Forget race. Love people.
The whole situation was poorly handled, yet reading the Wikipedia article on the situation in New Orleans before and after Katrina hit, I don't know that anyone would have done better. Most of the problems were actually years, and maybe even decades in the making. Levies and retaining walls that should have been updated and reinforced long ago. Disaster plans that failed to accurately assess the results of a category 4 (or 5) hurricane and officials who failed to fully appreciate the number of policemen and soldiers or the number of relief workers necessary to keep order and assist victims following a disaster of such proportion. I'm glad that, after doing some quick research beyond Wikipedia, it appears to me that the delays and problems were much more likely due to poor planning and a failure to understand the likely result of Katrina hitting New Orleans than to an actual racist attitude pervading the government. But the fact remains that the majority of the victims were black, and it's not very far to leap to see a racist agenda in the handling of Katrina.
Why is it that in a time of disaster, a time when we should be pulling together more than any other, we are purposely wasting energy perpetuating racist stereotypes that we all know are not true? Why, instead of attacking the president, aren't we encouraging him to take action, and taking action ourselves? Why are we looking for reasons to hate each other almost as hard as we are trying to help the victims of Katrina? Yes, the situation was handled horribly. Yes, most of the victims were black. But in my heart of hearts I hope and pray that what I feel to be true really is. This entire horror of a rescue effort was a result of poor planning, not racism. That difference may not matter to those who died, but it is direly important for those who survived.
Forget race. Love people.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Intel on Mac
It's amazing the things that have changed in just the last 48 hours when it comes to computing. Apple has finally done what pundits and users have begged for for years and years. They're dumping IBM and embracing Intel. What does that mean? Maybe not much, when it comes to the average user. Since they've licensed a technology they are calling Rosetta which will allow Intel based Mac's to run PowerPC based code seamlessly the change will be as painless (or even more painless) than the transition from OS 9 to OS X. For developers it means more work, but from the buzz I've seen from developers at the Apple WWDC who have had the opportunity to play with an Intel based Mac it won't be nearly as bad as they feared. Many things will just recompile, but even those that will require non-trivial conversions will be much, much easier than first expected.
So should I scrap my plans to buy a new Mac in the next few months? Nah. The PowerPC's will be supported through at least one more iteration of the OS, and developers will probably be developing for them at least that long. But I can't wait to get my hands on an Intel Mac Powerbook running at 4.7GHz - with a dual core processor. :)
So should I scrap my plans to buy a new Mac in the next few months? Nah. The PowerPC's will be supported through at least one more iteration of the OS, and developers will probably be developing for them at least that long. But I can't wait to get my hands on an Intel Mac Powerbook running at 4.7GHz - with a dual core processor. :)
Friday, June 03, 2005
Human rights
It's been a busy time for me, but not as busy as it has been for Amnesty International and others looking to further damage the US military's credibility. As if they needed help. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are dark spots on the US image, both at home and abroad. I'm enough of a patriot to question the conclusions of AI - not that agreeing with them makes you less a patriot than I - but I have to admit that there are some good points being made against the treatment of the "detainees" at Guantanamo Bay.
Are they military prisoners? No? Then they must be afforded the same legal rights as any other non-US citizen suspected of committing a crime in or against the US. Of course, if they are military prisoners, they must be accorded all the rights given to them by the Geneva Convention. There is no middle-ground. This isn't multiple choice. Either they are, or they aren't, prisoners of war.
Even in the current Limbo they are being kept in, there are basic elements of decency that must be adhered to if we want anyone to believe we are the "guardians of democracy." Respect, both for the person and their beliefs, is paramount. Without it we can claim no superiority, no greater righteousness, than the cowards who flew planes into the World Trade Center. Nor can we claim to anywhere near equal the courage and righteousness of the passengers who fought the terrorists, causing them to crash the plane, or the Iraqi citizens facing assassination by suicide bomber to vote, or to become a part of the Iraqi police force or military. Every day these people risk their lives to help us bring them to autonomy, and we repay them by doing stupid things that add fuel to the fire of the religious zealots seeking to kill them and drive us out of the country.
It's time to take whatever action you are able. If you've never written your senator or representative, now is a good time to start. We can make a difference by letting our elected officials know how we feel. Write them, tell them what you think of our treatment of "detainees" Write the president. Don't let the politicians lay blame at the feet of the military, pretending to have no say in what the military does. The military is under the government, and the government must control the military. Don't let either of them forget it. Human lives are hanging in the balance, on both sides of this war on terror.
Are they military prisoners? No? Then they must be afforded the same legal rights as any other non-US citizen suspected of committing a crime in or against the US. Of course, if they are military prisoners, they must be accorded all the rights given to them by the Geneva Convention. There is no middle-ground. This isn't multiple choice. Either they are, or they aren't, prisoners of war.
Even in the current Limbo they are being kept in, there are basic elements of decency that must be adhered to if we want anyone to believe we are the "guardians of democracy." Respect, both for the person and their beliefs, is paramount. Without it we can claim no superiority, no greater righteousness, than the cowards who flew planes into the World Trade Center. Nor can we claim to anywhere near equal the courage and righteousness of the passengers who fought the terrorists, causing them to crash the plane, or the Iraqi citizens facing assassination by suicide bomber to vote, or to become a part of the Iraqi police force or military. Every day these people risk their lives to help us bring them to autonomy, and we repay them by doing stupid things that add fuel to the fire of the religious zealots seeking to kill them and drive us out of the country.
It's time to take whatever action you are able. If you've never written your senator or representative, now is a good time to start. We can make a difference by letting our elected officials know how we feel. Write them, tell them what you think of our treatment of "detainees" Write the president. Don't let the politicians lay blame at the feet of the military, pretending to have no say in what the military does. The military is under the government, and the government must control the military. Don't let either of them forget it. Human lives are hanging in the balance, on both sides of this war on terror.
Friday, May 06, 2005
The game's the thing
Illinois may soon institute state ratings for video games to protect younger players from inappropriate material. Game industry pacs are calling it an infringement of 1st amendment free speech. I call it a good idea - if parents want their children to play the latest Grand Theft Auto, that is their choice, whether or not I agree with it. But a 10 year old shouldn't be able to walk into the local game store and pick it up. Requiring an adult to be the actual purchaser of the game is not a problem. A free speech issue it isn't, and won't be unless adults are prevented from purchasing the game - and it might not be one, then.
Free speech is not carte blanche to say and do whatever you want, it is your right to tell the government what you think about it without being thrown in jail, tortured, and/or executed. It is your right to voice your opinion. It's not a right to say anything that comes into your head. Ever heard of slander and libel? How about the laws (upheld as constitutional by the courts, IIRC) that prevent you from shouting fire in a crowded movie theater? To claim that any and all communication is constitutionally protected goes against reason, logic, and 200 years of precedent.
What would make a game like Grand Theft Auto or the upcoming "The Warriors" protected? Are they social commentary? Not that I can tell - but others may prove me wrong. Are they politically or socially inciteful? Again, I don't see it. But they do make money. By the truckload. Should that be a consideration when deciding what is protected speech? I don't think so.
Free speech is not carte blanche to say and do whatever you want, it is your right to tell the government what you think about it without being thrown in jail, tortured, and/or executed. It is your right to voice your opinion. It's not a right to say anything that comes into your head. Ever heard of slander and libel? How about the laws (upheld as constitutional by the courts, IIRC) that prevent you from shouting fire in a crowded movie theater? To claim that any and all communication is constitutionally protected goes against reason, logic, and 200 years of precedent.
What would make a game like Grand Theft Auto or the upcoming "The Warriors" protected? Are they social commentary? Not that I can tell - but others may prove me wrong. Are they politically or socially inciteful? Again, I don't see it. But they do make money. By the truckload. Should that be a consideration when deciding what is protected speech? I don't think so.
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Sometimes privacy IS less important
Police in Toronto have begun to release photos related to a case of sexual abuse of a young girl. She was used for pornographic pictures, and the police had no more clues to follow. It didn't take long for a number of people to recognize a Walt Disney World hotel in Florida, and now they are releasing a photo of a young girl who was not abused, but is sitting on a couch apparently used for the other photos. I hope they find the girl and her abuser, and I applaud the police for this bold step. I do not want my personal information and image, or those of my family, published far and wide for anyone, but if it were my daughter, I might allow her picture to be shown. How many other girls might be saved if my daughter's picture led to the capture of a sexual predator? I would have to consider it if I were in that position.
I am not saying the parents of this little girl should release her picture, only that they should consider it. And I would not blame them one bit if they didn't. Releasing it could have serious repercussions for them, and especially for her. It's not an action to be taken lightly, if at all.
In this world of ever-present information on ourselves and others, I hope we can always recognize that there is a time when privacy comes second - and I hope lawmakers will know and understand that it is up to the individual to decide when that time is.
I am not saying the parents of this little girl should release her picture, only that they should consider it. And I would not blame them one bit if they didn't. Releasing it could have serious repercussions for them, and especially for her. It's not an action to be taken lightly, if at all.
In this world of ever-present information on ourselves and others, I hope we can always recognize that there is a time when privacy comes second - and I hope lawmakers will know and understand that it is up to the individual to decide when that time is.
Friday, April 22, 2005
So you call yourself Catholic
It amazes me that so many U.S. Catholics feel that they can disagree with the Pope on just about everything, and still be Catholic. I was raised Catholic, and I know that the Popes rarely issues infallible decrees - but come on people! If you don't want to follow the Pope's less than infallible decrees, become Presbyterian (Anglican for our friends in Great Britain). It's Pope free Catholicism. If you really feel a need to have a Pope, you're sort of stuck with Papal decrees. So decide how you really feel, and act on it. Don't just sit there and moan because you don't like the way the Church wants you to live your life.
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Iraq, do any of us understand?
I was using my "Stumble Upon" extension for Firefox to find new and interesting sites to read and bookmark when I stumbled across http://bushflash.com, a decidedly anti-Bush site. Most of his problems with President Bush have to do with the war in Iraq. The problems he has are legit, for the most part, but he seems unwilling to look at any viewpoint other than his own.
Sure, Bush's cronies are taking full advantage of the profit opportunities brought out by the war, but one purpose of the war that is largely ignored by everyone (perhaps purposely) is the need to keep terrorists out of the country. In that goal, the Iraqi war has been a huge success. Instead of terrorists planning the importation and detonation of a 'dirty bomb,' they are going to Iraq to push out the American soldiers. This is a rather cold blooded approach, since it guarantees you will lose soldiers and civilians and directs violence and mayhem away from
us to another country, but it has been effective so far.
Many things about this war are wrong, and I applaud sites like bushflash.com for keeping an eye on things. But we need to remember that there are also valid reasons to take war to Iraq. We have the option to join battle with terrorists on our turf or somebody elses. Self serving and cruel as it may sound, it is almost always better to fight on somebody elses turf. It focuses atention there instead of here.
And when it comes to terrorism, I would much rather they be there, if at all possible
Sure, Bush's cronies are taking full advantage of the profit opportunities brought out by the war, but one purpose of the war that is largely ignored by everyone (perhaps purposely) is the need to keep terrorists out of the country. In that goal, the Iraqi war has been a huge success. Instead of terrorists planning the importation and detonation of a 'dirty bomb,' they are going to Iraq to push out the American soldiers. This is a rather cold blooded approach, since it guarantees you will lose soldiers and civilians and directs violence and mayhem away from
us to another country, but it has been effective so far.
Many things about this war are wrong, and I applaud sites like bushflash.com for keeping an eye on things. But we need to remember that there are also valid reasons to take war to Iraq. We have the option to join battle with terrorists on our turf or somebody elses. Self serving and cruel as it may sound, it is almost always better to fight on somebody elses turf. It focuses atention there instead of here.
And when it comes to terrorism, I would much rather they be there, if at all possible
Saturday, April 16, 2005
The beginning
Not much to say in the beginning. I'll be posting random thoughts on random things, from computers to politics to religion to whatever.
One thing that's bothering me, though:
How can congress pass bankruptcy reform that does not allow expenses charged to you by identity thieves to be dismissed? Then two days later "congress turns attention to identity theft." Yeah, some attention. Leave your constituents roasting over a slow fire, then pretend to care by talking about the problem you chose to ignore. Show some balls - make the credit card companies tighten the requirements to get a credit card and show corporations that having Swiss cheese security guarding customers data will not be tolerated. Hold them liable for at least a portion of debt incurred due to identity theft made possible by lack-luster security. Let victims of identity theft at least be relieved of a significant (say at least 50%) portion of the debt the thief gifted them with.
Corporations are not part of our governmental system, or at least they're not supposed to be. Don't let them run the country, because what is best for them and what is best for the country is not necessarily the same.
Well, I guess I did have something to say after all.
Later
One thing that's bothering me, though:
How can congress pass bankruptcy reform that does not allow expenses charged to you by identity thieves to be dismissed? Then two days later "congress turns attention to identity theft." Yeah, some attention. Leave your constituents roasting over a slow fire, then pretend to care by talking about the problem you chose to ignore. Show some balls - make the credit card companies tighten the requirements to get a credit card and show corporations that having Swiss cheese security guarding customers data will not be tolerated. Hold them liable for at least a portion of debt incurred due to identity theft made possible by lack-luster security. Let victims of identity theft at least be relieved of a significant (say at least 50%) portion of the debt the thief gifted them with.
Corporations are not part of our governmental system, or at least they're not supposed to be. Don't let them run the country, because what is best for them and what is best for the country is not necessarily the same.
Well, I guess I did have something to say after all.
Later
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)