|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Freshmeat Releases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slashdot News
|
Department: slicing-up-the-pie Date: 2010-02-09T00:49:00+00:00 Comments: 21 bridges writes "The V3VEE project has announced the release of version 1.2 of the Palacios virtual machine monitor following the successful testing of Palacios on 4096 nodes of the Sandia Red Storm supercomputer, the 17th-fastest in the world. The added overhead of virtualization is often a show-stopper, but the researchers observed less than 5% overhead for two real, communication-intensive applications running in a virtual machine on Red Storm. Palacios 1.2 supports virtualization of both desktop x86 hardware and Cray XT supercomputers using either AMD SVM or Intel VT hardware virtualization extensions, and is an active open source OS research platform supporting projects at multiple institutions. Palacios is being jointly developed by researchers at Northwestern University, the University of New Mexico, and Sandia National Labs." The ACM's writeup has more details of the work at Sandia.
Read more of this storyat Slashdot. 


Department: party-like-it's-1997 Date: 2010-02-08T23:57:00+00:00 Comments: 41 angry tapir writes "Microsoft's XML-based office document format, OOXML, does not meet the requirements for governmental use, according to a new report published by the Norwegian Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (DIFI). The agency wants to start a debate over the report as part of its work on standards in the Norwegian government. (As we discussed a week ago, Denmark has already decided to choose ODF over OOXML)"
Read more of this storyat Slashdot. 


Department: size-does-matter Date: 2010-02-08T23:05:00+00:00 Comments: 50 natharward writes "A new development in nano-level diagnostic tests has been applied as a lab on a chip that successfully screened viruses entirely by their size. The chip's traps are size-specific, which means even tiny concentrations of viruses or other particles won't escape detection. For medicine, this development is promising for future lab diagnostics that could detect viruses before symptoms kick in and damage begins, well ahead of when traditional lab tests are able to catch them. Aaron Hawkins, the BYU professor leading the work, says his team is now gearing up to make chips with multiple, progressively smaller slots, so that a single sample can be used to screen for particles of varying sizes. One could fairly simply determine which proteins or viruses are present based on which walls have particles stacked against them. After this is developed, Hawkins says, 'If we decided to make these things in high volume, I think within a year it could be ready.'"
Read more of this storyat Slashdot. 


Department: ford-why-is-this-fish-in-my-ear Date: 2010-02-08T22:12:00+00:00 Comments: 112 nikki4 writes to tell us that in giving some major improvement tweaks to its existing voice recognition tool for the Smartphone, Google is aiming for new translator software that will provide instant translation of foreign languages. "The company has already created an automatic system for translating text on computers, which is being honed by scanning millions of multi-lingual websites and documents. So far it covers 52 languages, adding Haitian Creole last week. Google also has a voice recognition system that enables phone users to conduct web searches by speaking commands into their phones rather than typing them in. Now it is working on combining the two technologies to produce software capable of understanding a caller’s voice and translating it into a synthetic equivalent in a foreign language."
Read more of this storyat Slashdot. 


Department: shocking-discoveries Date: 2010-02-08T21:31:00+00:00 Comments: 151 MikeChino writes "As battery manufacturers race to produce more efficient lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles, some scientists are looking to make the cars themselves a power source. Researchers are currently developing a new auto body material that can store and release electrical energy like a battery. Once perfected, scientists hope the substance will replace standard car bodies, making vehicles up to 15 percent lighter and significantly extending the range of electric vehicles."
Read more of this storyat Slashdot. 


|
|
|
|
Latest from Techdirt.com
|
Mon, 8 Feb 2010 16:55:00 PST
This post is part of the IT Innovation series, sponsored by Sun& Intel. Read more atITInnovation.com.Of course, the content of this post consists entirely of the thoughts and opinions of the author. As part of ourITInnovation.comwebsite, we're hosting awebinar on data center productivity, on Wednesday, February 10th, at 9am PT/12pm ET, that should be a good discussion for those of you in the IT world. I'll be moderating, and we'll have short presentations from Chris Peters of Intel, talking about matching data center productivity to business productivity, and from Michael Rowan of Viridity Software, discussing productivity measurement from an energy management perspective (an increasingly important part of the equation). Following this we'll have a further discussion on these and related issues, including Q&A from attendees. You cansign up to attend here.
Permalink|Comments|Email This Story
  
Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:35:12 PST Obviously, we've been covering various stories of content creators who are making use of new methods and new ideas to build a successful business model in a very changed world. We get lots of content creators contacting us about what they're doing -- but so many are doing cool things these days that just what they're doing is becoming less interesting than the details of how well they're working. So it's great to see Ariel Hyatt, over at Music Think Tank, provide afascinating interview with Brian Mazzaferri, of the bandI Fight Dragons. While I think the interview leans a little too much towards the concept of1,000 True Fans(which I believe gets people waytoo focusedon the "number" rather than the concept of true fans and how to build them), there is plenty of interesting information provided.
I also find it a little disconcerting that in what appears to be a clear success story, Mazzaferri seems to keep acting as if it hasn't been a success. He talks, repeatedly, about how difficult it is to build up enough true fans to be successful -- especially with a larger band (I Fight Dragonshas six members). And yet, then he admits that the band is making enough money so that it's his full-time job. So clearly, the band has built up a strong enough fan base, combined with creative enough business models that it works. And they did this in less than a year! To me, that's really impressive, and it suggests the band has gotten off to a fantastic start. Yet, Mazzaferri keeps insisting that the 1,000 True Fan idea (and, again, I think it's a mistake to focus on the number) only works for a solo artist or a duo, while also admitting that as a band, they've probably only got closer to 500 true fans. It just feels like something is missing. Why is he so down on the concept when it appears to be working?
It's also interesting to see how the band has been making its money. He admits that for them, a lot of it has come from CD sales -- often CD sales done at live shows. He notes that because of the venue choices they've made, they don't make that much on live shows, but it has helped sell more CDs. But it does seem like the band realizes the benefit of offeringreally valuable scarcitieslike what we've seen work with other musicians as well -- and, of course, working hard to connect with fans through things like email and Twitter. When asked to break down where the money comes from, Mazzaferri highlights one unique offering that was a huge success for the band:Making limited-edition, very high-value stuff is awesome. We sold 100 Lifetime Membership USB drives for $100 each (lifetime admission to any IFD show, free digital content for life), and that was a huge $10,000 boon for us. All that said, it appears that he still thinks the only way to become a success today is to do a deal with a label -- and preferably a major one. I've always said that if bands don't want to really do what's necessary on the business side, there's nothing wrong with working with a label, though I think most musicians who end up signing a standard record deal may end up regretting it. It may speed up the ability to get attention, but it may make it more difficult to actually build asustainablecareer. Oddly, he seems to suggest the opposite, noting:My last big concern about the 1,000 true fans model is longevity. Most of the people using it work through the internet, and everything on the internet has an exponentially shorter shelf-life than it's Real Life corollary.
I just think there's very little data right now on how long an internet music career can last. Most traditional music careers, even people with a hit record, are lucky to last more than a decade, and so traditional music business literature says to make as much as you can while you're hot and save it up for when your career's over.
What's the new model for that? Is the expectation that an internet music career is longer than a traditional one? I suppose one could argue that, but it's a tough sell for me. The internet is fickle, and tastes change. I guess we'll see the truth of that as time goes on too. The problem is that on a typical record label deal, things don't really work that way for most musicians, either. It may work for the top of the top -- the ones that catch on quickly and become big. But for the majority of bands that sign with a major record label, they fail to really get big enough to matter, and the labels very quickly drop all support and the band becomes yet anotherunrecouped wonder. That's not a sustainable model at all, and it's certainly not a model of "making as much as you can while you're hot," since many signed bands never actually get hot enough to really make that much money anyway. It seems like a bottom-up approach that relies on building a strong relationship with the fans has a lot more chance of being long-term sustainable than a career fueled by a sudden rush of major label hype, followed by being dropped into the obscurity bin.
While Mazzaferri may not be entirely happy with where the band is today and its prospects as an unsigned act, it still seems like this represents a pretty good example of the new sort of middle class of musician that couldn't have really existed in the same format not so long ago. In the past, the only way you could really get to the point where the band was your full time job was to get a label deal first and have them give you an advance. But by doing creative things like the "lifetime subscription" offering,I Fight Dragonshas been able to reach that stage without having to sign a label deal. Now, it may, in fact, make sense for the band to now switch to a major label track, but I can't see anything in the band's experience that suggests that embracing a newer model of connecting with fans directly, and offering unique scarce reasons to buy, can't lead to a sustainable living.
Update: As is pointed out in the comments, just a few days ago, the band did, in factsign with a major record label. This isn't surprising, given what Mazzaferri was saying in the interview, since he seemed to conclude he needed to do that, despite the evidence to the contrary. I wish them luck, but I've seen so many bands make similar statements when they first sign with a label:"They were really interested in us from the get-go," singer Brian Mazzaferri tells The A.V. Club. "They're really interested in us keeping our creative control, as opposed to some other people, who were like, 'We really like what you're doing, but how 'bout we take out the chip tune?'" I hope that's true, and I hope the were "really interested" in letting the band keep creative control, but so many of these stories end up poorly, with the band realizing that, once its signed, it loses pretty much all leverage on these issues. The article also suggests that this will mean the end of the band emailing out free tracks. This would be unfortunate, as it would be a mistake to go against what helped build your fan base.
Permalink|Comments|Email This Story
  
Mon, 8 Feb 2010 14:14:00 PST Last week, in discussing its attempt to settle its lawsuit with Google over the Google book scanning project, the Authors Guild posted a rather interesting public letter, entitledTo RIAA or Not to RIAA, That was the Question. In defending the settlement, it notes that it could have fought the lawsuit to the end, but that it might have lost. In fact, this is why I supported the idea that Google should havefought on, because it seemed like Google had a strong fair use case -- something the Authors Guild admits. Even though the Authors Guild says thatitdisagrees that the book scanning project was fair use, an awful lot of copyright legal scholars seemed to believe that it was, in fact, fair use.
But the more interesting point is that the Authors Guild noted that even if itdid winthe lawsuit, that could actually make things worse, and it pointed to the RIAA's Pyrrhic victories over file sharing systems:Our settlement negotiations went on with full knowledge of what happened to the music industry. The RIAA (the Recording Industry Association of America) won victory after victory, defeating Napster and Grokster with ground-breaking legal rulings. The RIAA also went after countless individuals, chasing down infringement wherever they could track it down.
It didn't work. The infringement just moved elsewhere, in unpredictable ways. Nothing seems to drive innovation among copyright pirates as much as a defeat in the courts. That innovation didn't truly abate until Apple came along with its iPod/iTunes model, making music easily and legally available at a reasonable price. By then, the music industry was devastated. While I applaud the Authors Guild for recognizing that suing (and even winning) don't help you innovate and can backfire massively in driving innovation underground, it does still feel like the Authors Guild got the wrong message out of this. Despite what it claims above, the "innovation among copyright [infringers]" did not really "abate" with the introduction of the iPod/iTunes. While the Authors Guild is correct that offering a legal solution is better than offering nothing or fighting innovation, it feels like it's overestimating how much of the market transformation its facing is due to infringement vs. how much is due toeconomic forcesthat will occur even without infringement in the market.
Permalink|Comments|Email This Story
  
Mon, 8 Feb 2010 13:04:00 PST Last summer, due to a DDOS attack emanating from IP addresses connected to 4chan, AT&Ttemporarily blocked accessto 4chan... without giving a full explanation for why. If you know 4chan, you know why this is a bad idea. It took very little time for the 4chan community to retaliate (and, as you know, no one "retaliates" like 4chan "retaliates"), and only a few days later, when AT&T explained what happened, did 4chan back off. So, now comes the news this weekend thatVerizon Wireless is blocking 4chan(this is just Verizon Wireless, not Verizon), and the company seems to be making the same mistake. No clear explanation of why.I'm sure there's a reason that Verizon Wireless can give, but not explaining that immediately seems like a huge mistake.Update: Not surprising, but looks like thesame reasoning as AT&T's temporary blocklast year. Still doesn't explain why the company wasn't upfront in explaining it.
Permalink|Comments|Email This Story
  
|
|
|