topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Saturday December 20, 2025, 1:44 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 78 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 88 ... 470next
2051
Living Room / Re: Movies or films you've seen lately
« Last post by 40hz on April 03, 2014, 01:12 PM »
Recently rewatched "Angel Heart".
I love the acting, directing, dialog, and cinemetography in this movie.  Very underrated imho.

+1! :Thmbsup:

Great movie with more than a few surprises. In some respects it reminds me of what Hitchcock might be doing if he were still around.

Put Mickey Rourke in any movie and you know its gonna get a little strange. Have a movie scene set in New Orleans and you know it's gonna get a little strange. Put Mickey Rourke in a movie set in New Orleans and it's gonna did get 'mo-betta stranger yet. ;D
2052
Living Room / Re: Movies or films you've seen lately
« Last post by 40hz on April 03, 2014, 12:56 PM »
Apollo 18.

18.jpg

Finally got to see it all the way thorough.

It's...not bad actually. Some pretty good low-key acting on the part of the astronaut characters in a few scenes. It could have been a lot better however. And all this "found footage" schtick is getting pretty old. But Apollo-18 is nowhere near as badly done as some reviewers would have you think.

So, for a cheap no-brainer bit of sci-fi inspired throw-away horror, it's moderately entertaining - even if you can guess the ending from about 20 minutes into the movie. After that, the final "big reveal" is pretty ho-hum. And it's also one that's been used before.

Possibly worth a watch if you don't have anything better to do (I'll admit to a little web surfing while watching it after about 45 minutes in) - or there's nothing else on.
 8)
2053
Non-Windows Software / NIX: KDE anyone? First thoughts.
« Last post by 40hz on April 03, 2014, 12:06 PM »
I'll confess I have a certain love/hate relationship with KDE. It was the first WM I ever used back when I first started getting acquainted with Linux. That was back in the days when Slackware was the reigning emperor - and using upstart distros like Redhat and SUSE and Knoppix was considered "rad." But lately there are times when I need (or prefer) to use certain KDE-based apps. So I thought this would be a good time to start getting familiar with KDE again.

Since I don't like to mix desktop environments on a Linux box, I went looking for a few KDE-oriented distros in order to get back into the swing of things. For those who don't know, KDE had it's ups and downs, and went through a fairly contentious period among its developers and users not too long ago. Luckily, the dust has seemed to settle. And the latest iterations of KDE look to be solid and back on track. So this seemed to be the ideal time to get back up to speed on the K{fill in the blank} universe.

My test machine is an HP Pavilion dv7 laptop sporting an Intel Core i5 CPU with 8GB RAM w/ATI Radeon 6400-series graphics and Intel Centrino-N 1030 BGN wifi.

For testing I tried the latest 64-bit versions of KWheezy and Mint 16 KDE Edition. Both were downloaded and "burned" to bootable USB for preliminary testing.

Initial impressions:

I started with KWheezy 1.5 since Mint is still getting a lot of software from Ubuntu repositories. I wanted to start distancing myself from things Ubu for a variety of reasons I've gone into elsewhere. If that comment doesn't make sense to anybody, don't worry about it. It's more a FOSS cultural/political issue that doesn't have a bearing on either distro for testing purposes.

On first bootup, KWheezy displayed an attractive splash sequence that eventually landed me on an equally pretty desktop. On first boot neither sound (which can be fussy on this laptop) nor the wifi interface came up configured correctly. After a second boot both seemed to work fine with no intervetion required, so whatever happened was likely a timing issue introduced by booting from a relatively slow USB 2.0 key.

All the major apps and goodies we know and like appeared on the menus by default. KWheezy is a distro that includes everything the average PC user could want (plus a whole lot more) by default. Hardly a slender distribution. But many people see that as a plus so I won't comment. Suffice to say most people won't need to open Synaptic to add anything to the mix anytime soon if they're running a Wheezy default install.

Things were looking good. Then the problems started. The Plasma desktop kept repeatedly crashing. Fortunately, crash recovery isn't the hassle for Linux the way it is for Windows. It was relatively easy to start a new user session and muddle forward. Except...it kept happening every 10 or so minutes. I don't know if this was just an issue with running the 'live' session rather than a 'bare iron' install. But it didn't give me warm fuzzies. Especially since booting a live session is often the best compatibility test you can run. If it works 'live' it will almost always work as well (or better) once it's installed.

That's something I'll need to explore later...on to Mint 16 KDE.

Mint launched noticeably more quickly than KWheezy. Probably because it was packing nowhere near as much baggage as KWheezy. Mint butchers in around half the download size. Running live it uses slightly less than 800Mb of RAM with a few small apps or a browser open. And it seems to consume between 3% and 5% CPU utilization when mostly idle.

Sound and wifi worked out of the box on first boot. Screen resolution was set correctly using a recommended driver. There were two additional accelerated drivers also available that I'll have to play with later. But as of now, the screen looks great.

There's a lot more apps loaded than  I usually use. It seems the full Calligra Suite along with Libre Office comes along by default. So there's definitely some "app overlap" in places. I'd definitely consider slimming that down at some point since I like to keep as little "stuff" on my machines as possible. FFox is the default web browser. And VLC is also included - which is a welcome surprise.

So far everything is working smoothly with no bad surprises. (I'm typing and uploading this in Mint KDE as we speak.) So it looks like Mint just might become my goto KDE distro despite my misgivings over its Ubuntu roots.

I'll have to sit down with KWheezy when I have more time to play - and ideally install it to disk first, rather than run it in a live session.


Anybody else putzing around with any of this? Or would anyone care to share their thoughts/advice/tips/war stories?

I'm all ears. :)

2054
General Software Discussion / Re: Repairing Windows 7 from the recovery console
« Last post by 40hz on April 02, 2014, 09:00 PM »
Vista for Vurbal, XP for me  ;)

And none of the above for 40hz!  ;D

Sorry. I couldn't resist. (Although I probably should have. ;))
2055
From TechDirt -

This is priceless:

Newscasters Reenact Final Four Moments Rather Than Wait For Game Highlight Rights To Clear
from the much-more-enjoyable-than-defending-fair-use-in-court dept


Pervasive and extensive copyright law is damage. Route around it. This team of newcasters did (even though it really didn't need to), resulting in something much more entertaining than the content being withheld.

    WCJB TV20 in Gainesville, Fla., couldn't legally show highlights of the University of Florida Gators' win over the University of Dayton on March 29. Instead of waiting for footage rights to recap the game, sports anchor Zach Aldridge recruited his coworkers to recreate the game's biggest moments in an office conference room.


Here are the highlights, as recreated using only classically-trained newscasters, a small hoop and a ball. Even the game-ending tears of a Florida Gators player are reenacted for posterity.


In his introduction, Aldridge claims the station would be unable to play the highlights until the following day unless it "broke a whole bunch of laws." Clearly, the use of highlight clips would be covered under fair use (hello, criticism, commentary and NEWS REPORTING).

But you know what? Screw the restrictive IP climate that surrounds every major sporting event. Why play by those rules? Route around it while highlighting the restrictive stupidity that prevents you from showing viewers what they came to watch. Have that clip go viral (388,000 views and counting), rather than the NCAA-approved clips handed out to local broadcasters like gifts from a begrudging God.

Here's the clip:



Love it! :Thmbsup:
2056
Sure, at that point they still could have walked away before signing anything, but most of these people are still relatively young, inexperienced people who were probably somewhat confused and unsure what to do at that point. Just trying to figure out what to make of it all, and if it could be salvaged. And perhaps some of them felt obligated or pressured into it after making a verbal agreement, even though technically at that point they weren't contractually/legally obligated to go through with it.

As a life lesson, I think this is called the 'Yes it can actually happen to me' factor. Which in fairness probably does fall under 40's use of the word naïve ... but that doesn't quite entirely convey the whole consumed by the machine reality of what happens in the real world's reality.


I'm sure that's likely a good part of how it played out. And I'm probably being unfairly harsh on them because of it. :-[

Oh well...what's done is done. All that matters now is what happens going forward. Onward! :Thmbsup:

2057
To me, it seemed the devs had won their battle - and had the show people groveling - but then consciously decided to let the whole thing go down in flames to hammer home their point. That seemed excessive to me.

So a group of people prone to and known for taking pride in their work, decide not to allow it and themselves to become a reality TV circus mockery. I'd say they didn't go far enough. But then again I get furious every time I see yet another pablemic swill of nonsense being foisted on the public in the name of reality TV. I dare say that this idiotic trend of frenzied emotional masturbation has damaged the human race by stilting its emotional development to the point that it will send ripples through generations for the next 300 years.

I think that if the production company responsible had gone bankrupt overnight it would be a fair measure and effective warning to other Reality TV types. That there really are some things in life that just do not need to be liberally seasoned with over the top bullshit drama. So stop treating the population like a bunch of high school level affirmation whores that need constant reassurance - usually by the belittlement of others - to feel O.K..

I'll agree. But only up to a point.

"In for a penny, in for a pound" as the saying goes. :-\

If you're gonna get into bed with this branch of the "entertainment" industry (and I use the term loosely) thinking that things are going to be different for you because you're: (a) smarter, (b) cooler, (c) nicer, or (d) 'well-respected' in your field - then you're either unbelievably full of yourself - or a lot more naive than I'd have credited anyone being if they ever watched television...

Reality TV is a blight which deserves to die an ignoble death. Hopefully before somebody really does get killed on one of these shows. (Add I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before somebody will.) But until that happens (and maybe not even then) these shows are here to stay. Because the sad truth is that the human appetite for mean kicks is still very much in evidence anywhere you look in our present society. We have our 'shock' comics who's act consists of wall to wall insults, cheap shots, and pointless snark. You have shows like An Idiot Abroad that revel in putting someone into situations ripe with opportunities for physical injury and personal humiliation. You have other shows that consist of nothing more than putting emotionally unstable and incompatible people into close proximity with each other - and then introducing a small irritant to get the ball rolling. Whoever came up with that "concept" probably spent half his childhood standing over anthills with a magnifying glass.

As one TV producer I know explained to me, the industry itself is "content neutral." It's all about eyeballs and 'likes' these days. As he put it (close as I remember), "We don't care what gets broadcast as long as people want and actually do watch it. My industry makes no judgements. Sure, we all prefer to televise good shows. But we'd be just as willing to televise a wall with paint drying on it if it will net us 100,000 regular viewers each week."

So yeah...TV producers probably do deserve whatever they get. >:D

But...

From what I'm reading, the devs also came in with an agenda. They certainly didn't need the money or the prizes. Or the fame since they're rather well known in their industry from what I can tell. They met the idiot in charge. They saw the bullshit contract. Some of them even agreed to non-disparagement clauses and ridiculous "sponsorship" rules.

Why?

To bring the mechanics of game development to a wider audience? There's better venues and shows to do that with. (And FWIW, no matter which art form you pursue, the vast majority of your adoring fans don't care at all how you do your voodoo. They just want your finished product. They applaud and pay you for the two-hour shows you put on. Not the years it took to learn how to play - or the hundreds of hours of practice and rehearsal that led up to it.)

Is it the old "I wanna be a rock star too!" syndrome? Heaven help 'em if they're being lured by that siren....

Seriously...why were they doing this garbage at all?

I don't object to them walking. I would have done the same. Although I wouldn't have needed a 'hot button' issue, like they seemed to need, to justify bailing out. The unbelievable level of discourtesy shown them from minute one would have been more than sufficient for me.*

So to sit back there blogging away like they they're all just sooo surprised and offended about what happened? I dunno...sounds more like some spin and damage control to my ears. They shouldn't have gotten involved at all and now they're trying to distance themselves as much as possible from it.

Maybe I have a lot more respect for these devs than they had for themselves when they let themselves get sucked into this deal.
 ;)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*  I guess the whole "issue justification" bit is more a generational thing. Especially now that we're no longer allowed to feel angry about anything - only offended by it.



2058
Living Room / Re: Best Investigative Journalism magazines or webistes?
« Last post by 40hz on April 01, 2014, 11:10 PM »
I'm partial to the Annenberg Foundation's FactCheck website:

Our Mission

We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.

I also think the narrowly focused website The Intercept looks promising:

About The Intercept

The Intercept, a publication of First Look Media, was created by Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill. It has a two-fold mission: one short-term, the other long-term.

Our short-term mission is to provide a platform to report on the documents previously provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. Although we are still building our infrastructure and larger vision, we are launching now because we believe we have a vital obligation to this ongoing and evolving story, to these documents, and to the public.

Our NSA coverage will be comprehensive, innovative and multi-faceted. We have a team of experienced editors and journalists devoted to the story. We will use all forms of digital media for our reporting. In addition, we will publish primary source documents on which our reporting is based. We will also invite outside experts with area knowledge to contribute to our reporting, and provide a platform for commentary and reader engagement.

Our long-term mission is to produce fearless, adversarial journalism across a wide range of issues. The editorial independence of our journalists will be guaranteed. They will be encouraged to pursue their passions, cultivate a unique voice, and publish stories without regard to whom they might anger or alienate. We believe the prime value of journalism is its power to impose transparency, and thus accountability, on the most powerful governmental and corporate bodies, and our journalists will be provided the full resources and support required to do this.

While our initial focus will be the critical work surrounding the NSA story, we are excited by the opportunity to grow with our readers into the broader and more comprehensive news outlet that the The Intercept will become.

 8)
2059
To me, it seemed the devs had won their battle - and had the show people groveling - but then consciously decided to let the whole thing go down in flames to hammer home their point. That seemed excessive to me. But I wasn't there, so it's easy to say, and possibly misses something major that pushed them to make that decision.  The accounts seem to be somewhat reluctant to get too specific, so the reactions seemed to be a tad extreme (to me) based on what the blogs were willing to say.

I'm not sure what the participants expected. But knowing how reality TV programming operates, and some of the terms in the contract offered, I find it a little hard to believe these devs (who are not stupid by any stretch) were that completely blindsided by how this thing was supposed to work. If they called it off after reading that first contract, I'd say it was understandable. But the second revised contract wasn't much better, and the presence of a "misrepresentation" clause and gag order agreement should have been more than enough warning to roll up their mats and go home.

But that's probably my take having seen and been through enough nonsense like this that I can sense something about to go off the rails from a mile away. Maybe, if I were still their age, it wouldn't seem so obvious to me.
 :tellme:
2060
I just finished reading through all the links. To my eyes this fiasco seemed to bring out some of the worst in almost everyone involved. And while I find myself more in support of the game devs than the show management, there seemed to be a good deal of 'speechifying' and posturing going down on all sides.

Reminds me very much of some of the shriller campus political battles that went on when I was in college. Once those situations went sour people usually stopped trying to make things work and started trying to "prove a point" or "send a strong message" instead. It seldom improved things once dialog was abandoned in the interests of "punishing" somebody.

Sad state of affairs.

So it goes.
2061
DC Gamer Club / Re: 86% of Gamers Prefer Free Games With Advertisements
« Last post by 40hz on April 01, 2014, 03:40 PM »
Reminds me of the old joke based on a Camel Cigarette ad that boasted "4 out of 5 smokers who tried one preferred Camels."

The tag line went: "But of their number 5 out of 5 said they still preferred doin' it with a woman."
2062


But even with the new anti-wrapper safeguards, what would prevent them from continuing to distribute the version they already have?

i think you're assigning to them a level of determination and resilliance that is unrealistic.  the more likely scenario is they have an automated process and if a particular installer doesnt "wrap well" for whatever reason, they probably throw it onto the pile of installers not to wrap, and move on.

I'll defer to your judgement since you're in the business and more knowledgeable than I am about these people.

But I can't help thinking once an app is in their catalog, it stays there until it gets replaced with a newer version. If I were doing what they're doing, and running an automated system, I'd be inclined to just leave an existing title where it was if it couldn't be updated to a later version.

Either way...it's a hassle no developer should have to go through just to protect their works.
2063
^But even with the new anti-wrapper safeguards, what would prevent them from continuing to distribute the version they already have? New users coming directly in from Google probably wouldn't be aware of what the current version number is.

2064
i'm wondering if, rather than a legal solution, i couldn't add code to the installer to make it hard to bundle in this way -- make the installer detect if one of these adware wrappers have launched it, and instead of installing, throw up a big warning and refuse to install.

For the respective user that would be too late though as once your installer runs, all the crap has already been installed.

Bingo! :Thmbsup:

Good catch phitsc! ;D
2065
i'm wondering if, rather than a legal solution, i couldn't add code to the installer to make it hard to bundle in this way -- make the installer detect if one of these adware wrappers have launched it, and instead of installing, throw up a big warning and refuse to install.

That's asking to play whack-a-mole in my opinion.* But I'm no coder so I don't know how difficult something like that would be to write. Or defeat...

I suppose it couldn't hurt to try.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*as in: This is a people problem - not a technical problem.
2066
Putt out all the bug guns. Copyright like you were saying, Comp Abuse Act, and others.

You just need to careful not to throw everything you can think of at them  to see what sticks. Because that damages your credibility and can also cause legal problems for you down the road. It's also the sign of a legal amateur. And attorneys - especially those of of the scheister variety - are wise to it. In the USA it's generally considered inadvisable to threaten legal action unless you're actually prepared to take it. Otherwise it throws you open to getting hit with a counter-suit from them for attempting to harass or intimidate. And since these guys have attorneys on payroll (and you probably don't) you'll want to avoid getting lawyers involved on either side if at all possible.

So I wouldn't recommend trying to call their bluff or scare them. You won't. And if they're a real sleazy operation, you definitely won't be the first that tried.

I think it's better (at least initially) to enlist a champion in the form of an ISP or a Google. These folks will generally cooperate with a DMCA takedown request regardless of the merits - as has been demonstrated by the number of times a DMCA takedown notice gets abused.

But again - DMCA only applies to copyrighted material. That generally means literature or media. Computer code itself is still up for debate - and the legal decisions made on that issue have been fairly capricious and arbitrary. Bundling an essay or an instructional video - with a registered copyright - sidesteps software licensing issues and their enforceability. Because copyright is a part of public law - and enforceable (in theory) by the state rather than by individuals as it would be under tort law.

But again, I'm no attorney either - so it's important to seek out the 'real deal' and get some solid advice. ;)

2067
Dr.Windows / Re: Dr. Windows recommended for April Fools Day Pranks
« Last post by 40hz on April 01, 2014, 08:13 AM »
Well... you could always install Windows 8 on somebody's machine... or would that just be cruel?
2068
DC Gamer Club / Re: 86% of Gamers Prefer Free Games With Advertisements
« Last post by 40hz on April 01, 2014, 08:07 AM »
I'd be more willing to believe them if they shared the experiment and metrics they used to determine this  alleged fact. How you ask a question, or interpret a response, can radically affect an outcome in a survey.

I'm generally suspicious of any industry "paid-for" study. Especially when dealing with marketing consultants that have a vested interest in "confirming" the validity of an industry's desired outcome or supporting a decision already made.

We Are IHS

And we know that every decision matters. That’s why leaders around the world rely on IHS to help them make the best choices. As the premier provider of global market, industry and technical expertise, we can scale our thinking across virtually any operation and enterprise, from ground-level tactics to high-level strategy. At IHS, the technology portfolio is the unique combination of strong legacy brands and proven research methodologies. Leveraging proprietary market data, forecasts, and analyses, IHS Technology provides comprehensive industry coverage across all key technology sectors.

dsbs.jpg

Maybe what they're saying is, in fact, true. But it will take more than a bald assurance that "a study has found" to convince me this isn't largely a pile of self-serving bullshit being used to justify somebody's decision to change their business plan.

Seriously! What's comes next? An annual or monthly "subscription"  that lets you turn off their advertising?

That'd be a cute move since having that would allow a company to argue any ad blocking used with its software (or website) is now a license violation, right?

It's coming kiddies. You read it here first. >:(
2069
Would it not be possible to insert a clause in the license that states your software cannot be bundled with additional software or use an installer other that the one provided by the original author without specific written permission? That gives you a legal leg to stand on. And while a lawsuit is probably out of the question for most small code shops due to the cost involved, it does give you some "administrative legal" options - such as a complaint to an ISP or a search engine. It's sad to resort to some of the legal nonsense big companies use to bully or otherwise abuse the legal framework. But since it looks like this will be a permanent part of the tech landscape, it's also silly to not use it to your advantage.


Here's a thought...

How about embedding an article - with a registered copyright - in the installer or app itself. Maybe an essay on DonationCoder or the whole donationware concept. It doesn't need to be intrusive. When the installation is completed there's a link in the 'installation completed' dialog box and on the 'about' screen that lets the user read all about it. A block of text shouldn't bulk things up too much.

DMCA takedown rules don't apply to trademarks or licenses. But they DO apply to registered copyrighted works - which allows you to send notice (without hiring an attorney) to the ISP or website administrator demanding the title be taken down. Or to Google requesting the link pointing to another site that's carrying your software be removed because said software includes a copyrighted literary work that is being distributed without permission.

Might be worth a try. :)
2070
Living Room / Re: April 1, 2014
« Last post by 40hz on April 01, 2014, 05:47 AM »
Google: "We are changing our Terms and Conditions so that personal data will only be accessed upon expressed written consent of the individual."

 ;D ;D LOL!  ;D ;D
 :Thmbsup:
2071
Living Room / Re: Hypothetical hypothetical question
« Last post by 40hz on March 31, 2014, 06:44 PM »
Do try hard to learn about prior work -- don't ignore it -- it could save you immense amounts of wasted time,


Very very very important point!

Learn from history and other people's mistakes. Sometimes the absence of competitors is the surest sign something is a very bad idea.

One business adage I've learned to respect over the years is the one that goes: Don't fall for the mistaken belief that the fact "nobody else is doing it" automatically makes something a good idea. Many times nobody else is doing it because it's unworkable - or it isn't worth doing.

 8)
2072
Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Ocster Backup Pro 8 disct expires 3-31-14
« Last post by 40hz on March 31, 2014, 03:50 PM »
Price is definitely exceptional for an imaging/backup product that supports Windows Server as this product appears to.  :tellme:
2073
Living Room / Re: Hypothetical hypothetical question
« Last post by 40hz on March 31, 2014, 02:03 PM »
Regarding all that planning etc, I'd go the other way - talk is cheap and educational. Instead imagine what the "sunk costs" would be: how hard is it to do a cute little hobby prototype of the idea? Then you and a few friends goof off with it. If there's "burgeoning excitement" then you go back and do the plan for an investor.

If it's genuine friends who are talking, I'd pretty much agree here.

It's when somebody shows up out of the blue, or courtesy of somebody who's just trying to get the caller off their phone, that I ask for a little more demonstration of thought and commitment. And definitely before I'll consent to spending a few hours of "brainstorming" (i.e. BS-ing) over a pizza.

The last person that called me had a "super idea" for something that could "revolutionize using the web on a PC." But it was important, he said, that we move fast on it before somebody else though of it too.  8)

His idea? Putting a key on the keyboard that automatically added .com after wherever the cursor was. He figured that "since we're all using the web constantly, not having to type .com all the time would be a major time saver." :-\

Yep! That was the "super idea." :tellme:  I guess he never heard about the <CTRL><ENTER> combo...   :huh:

He wanted to know if I'd be interested in going in with him on a patent search... ;D

Now you know why I ask for something more than just "an idea" before I'll waste more minutes of my life I'll never get back.
2074
Living Room / Re: Hypothetical hypothetical question
« Last post by 40hz on March 31, 2014, 11:21 AM »
I don't think it's really possible to investigate or research something without leaving some footprint behind. Especially if you do it mostly online where everything is ultimately trackable. And it's probably a quixotic quest to even attempt to get completely around that.

What's really important is what gets done with an idea. Ideas are a dime a dozen and not protectable for precisely that reason. Humans progress by freely borrowing, adapting, and exchanging ideas. It's what we do. And probably what we always will do despite so much recent misguided IP legal theory to the contrary.

I get tapped a couple of  times a month on average by somebody who wants to discuss an "idea" for something. Usually a new business. I tell them to put together a preliminary business and marketing plan first and then I'll be happy to discuss it with them. That's usually the last I ever hear from them - either because they can't be bothered to do the work of putting a plan together - or because they did do a plan and realized their idea either wasn't (a) doable or (b) worth doing.

I've come to believe planning, execution and timing are the three most critical factors for success in almost every human endeavor. A brilliant or original idea lands somewhere around eighth in importance. And originality is vastly overrated when it comes to building or conducting a business. So is genius, whatever that overused word still means.

If somebody has an original ideal they want to pursue, I think the best approach is to stop worrying about somebody stealing it. Somebody stealing your original business model is a different story. But business models are really about the execution of an idea. They're not the idea itself.

Got an idea? Gather together three or four people who's opinion and insight you can trust and bounce it off them. If it looks like a go, add a few more people with domain specific expertise and sit down (under a non-disclosure agreement if you feel the need) and have at it hammer and tongs. Usually within a group of carefully selected cronies and advisors there will be enough expertise to evaluate an idea and start something rolling. And all without making too public a hoo-hah.

dm.jpg

Don't know if this adequately addresses your original question, but hey, I get on a roll every so often. ;D

2075
Living Room / Re: Recommend some music videos to me!
« Last post by 40hz on March 31, 2014, 06:07 AM »
That will get it done!!

Sure does! :o

I think it's a riot how she mirrors Mick's stage moves - and then does them 10X better. Talk about getting pwned! ;D ;D ;D

Definitely check out 20 Feet from Stardom.  These ladies have talent, brains, and above all, class. Their interviews and comments speak volumes about the music industry - and those people that make it work despite their contributions remaining mostly unacknowledged. I expected there to be some bitterness in places. But there wasn't any. Just a lot of laughter, philosophical perspective, and the occasional moments of sadness about the break that never seemed to come despite promises made.

It's on NetFlix. Watch it. :Thmbsup:
Pages: prev1 ... 78 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 88 ... 470next