"So making music isn't working? Let me guess, you think it's limos everywhere, all the liquor & drugs you can consume, private jets from city to city, and a nonstop parade of 18 year old supermodels through your bedroom?"

You obviously didn't read my post... why am I reading yours?

Programming isn't bitches and switches either, but I don't collect massive royalties off everything I create. There are usage models I can contract (like 10% earnings after cost produced on software I wrote, but again this wont pay the bills. Software also needs to be maintained. Are musicians going to start sending me music updates?

"So the jobs are very similar! How much does an average programmer make, versus an average working musician, again? And would you take a programming job offering the same wage as a working musician, without grumbling about how little you got paid?"

I had some friends who had a band they each got around 150-200 for four hours work... in a bar... drinking free drinks. Yes... yes I would.

"As opposed to the average programmer, who doesn't sit on his ass all day and plunk away on a keyboard, while demanding a ransom for his work because he knows Visual Basic? I don't think Ms. Keating suggested she wanted a "ransom" for what she put out - she's saying "this style of music distribution sucks for musicians," and she's right - it does."

Actually I average in excess of 50 hours a week. I often have to work at odd hours... travel... hoist 50lb+ servers into racks... blah blah blah... you don't know much about the demands of a career in technology do you? It's not music distribution, it is advertising at best.

"Your employer calls you in and says, "you know, we're moving to a streaming model. You're going to get half a cent every time somebody uses your software, instead of a salary. And since nobody loses anything by copying it, we're going to also take the software you produced, and share it online so that customers can download it for free. Unfortunately, we can't track that usage, so you won't get paid at all for those - but it's not like you lost a sale, if the software wasn't free, they probably wouldn't have bought it anyway! But cheer up, you should be excited just to simply have the skill to be a creative computer professional with the skills to do this - the effort is its own reward!"

Yes, but is it web user base? LOL, so .005 dollars everytime clicks a link to a new page?!?!? Sign me up!!! Do I get the same for each library too!?!?!?

Oh, and do I get to also like actually do coding at some other place of business whilst I rake in the money from your project too!

Yeah... your post wasn't worth reading after all. Please... try again.

Apparently I owe Ms Keating my apology. Uploading her own works to build her fan base definitely qualifies as "getting her hustle on". As for any artist making around 40 cents for someone simply hearing their music; I would have to say that is an excessive payment and the diminished royalties should come as no surprise to anyone once whatever error that caused it was fixed. As for the misrepresentation on the part of the New York Times I will quote her on this:

"like I’m often disappointed in the press."

Lets just add that on to taxes and death as the only things certain in life.

Thank you for the clarification EvanED.

I agree, and I also find it odd that so many musicians feel like they should not have to work. Compare to me as a programmer. Both have to build their skill set, both have to use creativity and logic, we both have to produce works and others consume these works. I have to go into work at least 5 days a week, and they want to sit on their ass and plunk away on an instrument while getting paid a ransom for what they put out. Me, I'm constantly improving what was done, producing more and supporting those consumers. This applies to a programmer in a large corp all the way down to a lone wolf. We fail to do this we end up not making money.

Maybe I should go in to work on Monday and tell them they need to pay me my salary for the rest of my life for the work I've already done. I wonder how well that will go over.

Not all musicians are like this one who laments not having "a significant live business". No, I like bars with live music where some guy I've never heard of is plugging away at his trade. If he is cool I'll buy him a drink, and if I like his music I'll perhaps buy a CD. This person is actually working... they show up for work dressed, skilled and with equipment in hand. I respect this person for it. If you want my cash you better be offering more then some recording tweaked digitally, mastered and mass produced with zero engagement from you.

IMHO, Zoe Keating and musicians with the same attitude are the patent trolls of the music industry. If Ms Keating wants to earn more she needs to engage her fans more. Do more shows... hell, some rappers make their money just walking up to people in public, meeting them, to sell them their CD for 5$. They have their hustle on, where is yours Ms Keating? I find it ironic that some thug ass gansta rapper politely asks me if I would like buy his CD to support him... signed at no extra charge, yet at the end of this posted story we have a group who would love to reach into everyone's pocket and just take our money.

I'm a musician too Zoe... check this out, I'll play the world's smallest violin for you.

One is where you feel your life is directly threatened and had no recourse but to kill before being killed. The second is what is called "mayhem" where, for example, someone has opened fire on the public targeting at random. Given their violent display someone might return fire seeing this as an act of terrorism. It isn't reasonable to assume that a military class helicopter, machine gun blazing out the side, randomly targeting civilians as being a legitimate military action. As a juror I would be unable to hold someone to account for returning fire, and I strongly feel that whoever was responsible for authorizing this "training exercise" should be charged in a criminal court for charges ranging from disturbing the peace all the way to an overt act of terrorism. The discharge of weapons in public is completely unacceptable under any situation where they are not responding to a invading hostile force. Our military has always made mock ups of training scenarios in the past kept in remote areas in effort. What madness... what extreme incompetence in decision making led to this idiocy? We pay taxes to maintain a standing military to keep our nation from being a war zone. Why would anyone ever think this was OK?

I can't really say that I agree with this unless there are plugins you have in mind. Still, that is coming from someone who only did minor image editing back in the 90s and became accustomed to GIMP some time around the end of the 90s. Out of curiosity what features do you still find lacking from GIMP? Could it be you have not used GIMP in some time and are speaking from memory of a distant version? While I wouldn't put GIMP up against today's Photoshop I would imagine it could at least best any version from the 90s. Still, since I am not all that familiar with Photoshop I can't say for certain.

Does anyone have extensive knowledge of both that might shed some light on the matter?

So let me see if I have this right. Iran launched what is effectively a dud ICBM with a monkey strapped to it and the western world has to hear about it in a Iranian press release relayed by a Canadian news outlet? Somehow I think if this story were true it would have had better coverage. Not to slight Iran, but the image of the rocket in the story looks like it would be lucky to have enough fuel to reach a neighbor's soil, but this wouldn't be the first time an image that had nothing to do with a story was used in the absence of related content. I would love to see an Iran that abandoned... whatever that is they are doing now, and embraced science for the sake of science instead. Unfortunately that just doesn't seem to be in line their priorities.

True, it is hard to see the issue. If you are out of contract it seems you are allowed to modify, but that only underscores how silly this all seems. Unlocking does not free you from your contractual obligation to the company who subsidized your phone. It seems carriers are somewhat agreeable to an unlock when you travel abroad. So in reality this is do little legislation that only really affects those who start a contract to get a cheap phone only to jump ship shortly after with no intention of ever making good on the contract. In the end you suddenly realize that it is likely just better to stop buying phones tied to a two year contract, or perhaps make that the phone be unlocked a stipulation of your entry into a new contract.

Oh, and you might want to examine their contract and make sure it doesn't invalidate any verbal agreement made with them that you hopefully record with their knowledge. You then might want to tailor your verbal agreement to specifically override such measures of any later written contract that would render the written contract void if challenged. Not exactly sure how best to do this as I will just buy a phone outright and allow my carrier to interface my hardware/software. As for the former trick...

Excuse me... is their a liar in the house... err, lawyer... I meant lawyer?

Did you not see I admitted to skimming the original post? Is it that you "can't read", or maybe you just skim a bit too much all the while failing to make any real contribution whatsoever. When suggesting the magnification software I also said "or any other OS with a built in magnifier". No... didn't see that? In fact everything I said translates to Linux, FreeBSD or OSX. To be more specific then the generalized, actually platform independent, response I gave would really just be advocacy of particular products. Perhaps you are too inexperienced to realize this fact. I could be wrong... maybe you'll now surprise us with a superior suggestion to my own that would actually be useful to OP. I hope you'll excuse me if I forgo holding my breath in anticipation.

Never the less, thanks AC, your post was as enlightening as usual!

To those interested, the Ubuntu workstation I do my development on didn't seem to have a magnifier installed by default, but I'm sure I could apt-get something on the following list if needed:

http://www.magnifiers.org/links/Screen_Magnifiers/UNIX_Linux/

My apologies... I have a job and must skim much if I am to have time to read Slashdot. I'm so sorry that I took the extra time to quickly make a response I thought might help the OP. In the future I will refrain from being helpful, but for now I should point out that simply adding a camera, using the software that came with it, to my suggested configuration would do the trick. Didn't think of that, did you, coward? Hell, he could just use a very large monitor that can be turned 90 degrees and set a low resolution for that monitor, again with the camera software, to accomplish the desired effect. Didn't think of that either, but let us be honest... you don't post as AC to think or be helpful. No, like the majority of AC, you are just came on here to be an worthless jackass.

I would also suggest to OP, if using the 90 degree rotated monitor, that getting a camera that can have it's image rotated as well would make using this idea easier. I also suggest a camera that is high resolution. Enlarging a low quality image can cause the letters of the text to be a bit fuzzy.

If you are using Windows (or any other OS with a built in magnifier) just get a video card that supports dual monitors,set them to be a spanned desktop, put the magnification viewer app on one and work on the other. Really, it is often as easy as buying the video card, installing it and using it's settings application. There is no generic way to give directions other then that. You'll have to use the directions from the company that made the video card for details in setting up a dual head configuration.

You can't block the doors to an abortion clinic to prevent anyone from accessing services. Typically the objective of DDOS is to prevent access to service, but in the case of just slowing it you still hit the issue of blocking. You can't legitimize blocking an abortion clinic by repeatedly lining up to talk to the receptionist. It might work for a while, but when you banned from the premise and continue to queue you'll soon be arrested. In the end it is merely the obstruction of services provided by the clinic that gets protesters arrested. Until they find a network equivalent way to stand at the side in a public area while holding and sign shouting their propaganda such attacks will, and should, remain illegal. Not that this will stop them from happening, but an attempt to legitimize this seems a bit silly. Particularly when most DDOS attacks utilize systems not owned by the attacker.

Yes, I do realize that Anonymous usually utilizes volunteers, and that is commendable. Still, when the legal fallout for their actions hits these volunteers they should be arrested (have their internet connection taken offline by their ISP for a few days, kin to 72hr max arrest w/o charge). Criminal prosecution of them seems a bit excessive, but civil lawsuits against them for losses should be applicable. This allows for a virtual version of the bad behavior we see at some physical protests while keeping the repercussions for their actions in step.

On a side note, would a mistyped domain name that shows a parody site be the online equivalent of burning an effigy? I miss the spirit Americans once had while expressing their disappointment in administration. What better says "I strongly disagree with your policies" then making a mock up of a politician and burning it in the public square whilst cheerfully pumping one's rifle, pitch fork or torch gleefully into the air?

Have him pick a small section for rewrite. Have him rewrite it. Code review. If he manages to make improvements without adding bugs let him do it a few more times. If he continues to be solid release the chain. If he fails use the reviews to teach him what he is missing, and in the process you'll gain a developer you are more confident about making changes to the code base.

I'm guessing you have never seen a circuit with an unnecessary etching in it. The "mark of the beast" as they call it, or "666", could be present in the device as such. It could potentially be present in many ways. Decades ago, when RFID technology was still on the drawing board, someone raised the idea that it could be the "mark" required to purchase goods and such, thus forcing it upon the people. As you are aware, there are already RFID tags present in devices used to perform transactions. Whether irrational or founded it really doesn't matter. Why are you so dead set on foisting your beliefs on others? That is just as irritating to me as these damned mindless zealots cramming Jesus down my throat at every turn.

In reality this should never have even been the point. The use of this technology is an invasion of privacy and at best is just an example of administration mitigating a minor inconvenience on their part by forcing a major compromise on the part of the students. They don't have to be tracked off campus for this to be so. Take going to the restroom for example. This system KNOWS if they dropped a deuce or took a tinkle! They'll have a nice history of it too. What? No RFID pickups in the bathroom? It isn't hard to figure out when students drop into that nebulous zone where the bathrooms are and use time to determine the most likely use of facilities. How about when they visit the school nurse? How tightly are they controlling this data? How long is it kept? Are policies on the use of this data written in stone or is it to be changed on a whim?

I use RFID tech for work myself, and even give a couple finger prints for door access. I accept it because I like the convenience, but some still have keys. Given that there are cameras at all entrances I somehow doubt my company would disrespect someone's religious beliefs no matter how ridiculous over such a little thing. Oddly enough we are headquartered in Texas.

I'm an agnostic... I simply can't prove the existence of whatever baseless beliefs people have. Be it of faith in God or belief that there is no god... I'm horrified how disrespectful of each other these two groups are. What we could all use is a little more consideration of other people on items that don't really concern us in the first place. For this school system that would mean implementing policy changes, perhaps decades ago, to get the same result of increased revenue by perhaps allowing someone to sign in at a classroom at any time. Yes, it might take just a tiny bit more effort on their part, but hey... they are PAID to do it. Nope, the lazy administration wasted money to implement an unnecessary system. This resulted in unnecessary litigation. Resulting in unnecessary legislation. Resulting in YOUR lost tax dollars because some little girl's right to her religious beliefs being violated and the carelessness of a lazy overpaid school administration.

Our forefathers came here to be free. While we can blame the government for what seems to be a long term assault against such freedoms their greatest ally in the cause of eroding our freedoms can all too often be found in the mirror. I don't care if you smoke pot. Don't care if you want to marry a man, woman or a horse. I don't care about anything as long as you are your only victim. I'm sure we could get along well enough if everyone could do the same, but sadly with 95% of us that is just not the case.

We have another opportunity for the flu shot fascists to espouse their message of authority over individual rights, and perhaps some of the zealots who feel these shots are an affront to their deeply held beliefs? Bring forth the flu shot pseudoscience conjecture from both sides of the debate! Please, this time, explain how your sources established a large enough pool and maintained control of subjects to avoid contamination for a proper experiment! I bet our fascists have great suggestions on how we could better control unwilling medical experiment subjects taken from the peasantry! Please, I need a good laugh.

Nexion