Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I'll give you the point on digital broadcast radio; a copy of the bitstream should be easy to record. I tend to forget about its existence, since I don't have a receiver.
2) It's fine for non-audiophiles. Digital radio is transmitted at 48-128kbit/s in the U.S.using lossy compression anyhow, and it would still outperform FM, which is more than likely playing from digital audio sources anyhow, even for the analog transmissions.
Vinyl's a non sequitur here. How many people would be able to record to vinyl anyhow? And if they've got their own higher-quality recording of the music, then they aren't going to be listening to it on the radio (let alone recording it from there), so it's a moot point.
Spotify etc. are
Each extra listener increases bandwidth costs, which old radio didn't. This is a trade-off for all the demographic info that the publishers get, so it's a direct cost paid for some marketing information.
Plus it's generally easier to record songs off the radio than it is off Spotify
I'd disagree with that. On Spotify et al, I've got my recording+processing equipment built into my listening equipment. That's not necessarily the case with radio, and the best I could hope for is a 2nd-gen analog copy anyhow.
So why does the music industry hate streaming music so much when radio is in every way an inferior distribution / advertising method?
Change is risk, and big business is vehemently opposed to risk. Better the enemy you know than the one you don't.
Most people do the same with their cars
Irrelevant. With my Toyota, I can buy standard parts, jack the car up, and do the work myself if I choose. Changing the oil or other fluids, changing filters, and other things that comprise regular maintenance aren't that hard to do.
It's the same with my laptop (Sager in a Clevo case). I can replace the RAM, CPU, storage, optical drive, and GPU. The battery is removable and replaceable. What I'm expected to do or not doesn't really matter to me; what I can do matters a great deal. Soldered-on parts would've meant that my laptop would have been replaced several years ago. Instead, I bought new standard parts and upgraded the sucker. If I had an older Mac where the drive, RAM, and battery were still removable, I would've upgraded it too. Years ago, I helped a friend do the same with an iBook. It was a pain in the ass, but it was doable. Not anymore.
It's not unlike how C++ is super poweful but python's simplicity lets you focus on the creative part more.
Python's great for throwing data around, and implementing all the glue code that holds a program together. All the interesting parts of the program are in libraries written in C, though. I feel the same way about OSX. It's wonderful, clean, and smooth for everyday desktop use, but if you want to start doing something a little "off the beaten track", it's more hassle to get things working, partly because the culture of "it just works" discourages tinkering and customization. Similarly, Python's culture seems to frown on getting down into the nitty-gritty of how things work.
Having homogenous hardware facilitates learning the "how" of getting something to work, but that's only important in the short term. Long term, I think it's much more important to learn the "why" of the functionality. Linux forces you to find out *why* it matters that the other person's setup is different. It's more work, but I see value in it.
Standards are good, but being able to depart from them, if you choose to do so, is even better.
the new ones come with Free Windows 10
The Raspberry Pi version isn't released yet, but it's likely to bear some similarities to the Intel Galileo version that has had a preview release of the OS, since they're being released under the same "Internet of Things" development program. On that platform, it's serial-only with no graphics output. In the preview version, it's mostly just a host for C/C++ projects using a Wiring-style library to access the GPIO on that board (although I think that support for
I could be wrong, but I don't see the RasPi2 version of Windows 10 being remotely similar to the PC release of the OS. The evidence implies that it won't be.
its an h1b market
I see that repeated over and over, but I've never had trouble finding a job. I've worked (remotely) with contractors from Slovenia, China, and India, and the pattern that I've seen is that they generate more work for me fixing their broken code than they take away from me by doing the initial implementation. I'll worry when I stop seeing a coder with 10 years of experience making mistakes that I learned to avoid while I was still in school. Until that time, I can successfully compete on quality.
What do you care what kind of hardware the "vast majority of PC buyers" who don't care about this feature use?
Because hardware manufacturers are going to go after the largest part of the market possible, not cater to the fussy long tail of malcontents that need uncommon features like the ability to load their own OS. We've finally gotten to the point where I don't need to be incredibly picky over the hardware that I buy to ensure that it'll run Linux acceptably. I don't want to have to research through user forums for anecdotal evidence that some particular piece of hardware was mislabeled as not being locked down, and I don't really want hardware that I might have to break the warranty on to do something that I do with all of my hardware as a matter of course (shrink the Windows partition and throw Linux on the sucker). That is why I care about what the unconcerned masses are running.
Solution: Overwhelm customer support with inquiries regarding this setting for every piece of hardware that is undocumented.
As a last resort? OK, if it's the only way to get the hardware that I need. As a first choice of solution? I'd rather not.
All that isn't denying the fact that I'd feel unsafe taking my wife and mixed-race son into some parts of the South, but that doesn't have much to do with puritanism or religion.