As for the technological argument, why should digital, as opposed to analog, communication require "random listening"?
Here's one riff, selected (almost) at random: "Listening to Clapton is like getting a sensual massage from a woman you've loved for the past 10 years; listening to Van Halen is like having the best sex of your life with three foxy nursing students you met at a Tastee-Freez.
The child would first be allowed to test the icons at random, listening to their sounds, looking at their pictures and interacting with the application.
The simple fact is that communication is not radically different today, except that there is more of it, making random listening, in fact, virtually pointless.
In Session 3, participants first completed the blocked or random listen-and-repeat and the blocked or random sentence production tasks once again, as described for Session 2 (see Table 4).
Analysis and simulation is used to compare LPR to two well-known approaches — the random listening algorithm (RLA) [Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM (1998)] and the worst estimate-based tracking (WET) [Proceedings of IEEE Infocom (1999)] approach.
Both counter-based and distance-based broadcast protocols use random listening periods which can be counter-productive: nodes of higher topological importance may be preempted from retransmitting if the listening timer of less 'important' nodes in their vicinity expires first.
Random moments to listen for: Tom Peterson's bass clarinet bits on "One Bell Ringing," Mike Compton's vocal harmony on "Slow Drag with Josephine," and the specters of George Jones and Percy Sledge hovering over "That's Not the Part of Him You're Leaving".
Turn on a radio at random times and listen for a message.
But if you just tune into the site on a random Tuesday and listen to what's going on in LA, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, it's much more mundane.
If you were a random person criticizing random objects, who would listen to you?
