Slashdot Mirror

From the article: "Rentacoder gives you the illusion that the arbitrators are qualified to make decisions in regarding complex issues. This in not correct whatsoever, and you are slave the people, that have had the title of arbitrator given to them"

OMG! We are slave the people!

On a serious note, maybe instead of arbitrators, we need Arbiters .

The Judicators are clearly the right men aliens for the job.

Some enterprising person came up with a series of far better ones:

http://homepage.mac.com/rcareaga/diebold/adworks.h tm

here. It can grab an image using a single photocell. Note that the photocell (1) doesn't move and (2) collects light over a wide angle and yet I can still produce a picture. Yeah, yeah. It's not as good as your camera. But I don't have a multi-million dollar corporation funding me, just $100.

Ah, the "Lotus Notes worst interface ever but we won't change it because it will upset all three loyal users who like it instead of wasting tons of money for everyone else"-defence.

There is no such thing as autorun on OS X

Actually, there is, but only if you run classic in OS X. It's called Autostart in QuickTime. If you have Classic installed *and* running, it will still work. This page mentions it, and there used to be a test exploit page located at http://www.u-struct.com/diary/img/20020131_OSissue _E/ but it seems that link is no longer active. It's an exploit that has been known about for years, but it's very low risk now. You're only at risk if you run the Classic environment, and then it can be disabled in your classic QuickTime preferences. More information about disabling QuickTime's autostart can be found here.

Oliver Curry, judging by his list of publications (see http://homepage.mac.com/scottukgb/EMPG/members.htm l#oc) is not an active scientist (the singular Nature publication is a book review) and calling him "evolutionist" is not really correct. Actually, I assume he is one of those hand-waving social psychologists who do not understand even the basic principles of population genetics or molecular evolution, yet are loud enough to get on BBC with their speculative, pseudo-scientific theories.

j.

Only if I am running after whoever put this flash ad on top of the article. I promise to contribute a more substantial comment if only I am allowed to RT to FA.

A 20 mile round trip, twice a week, will let you pick and choose your cycling days, and still lose (my estimate) about a pound per week (I'm down 20 since I got serious about biking more). This is something that you can ease into, if you are the timid/prudent sort. If you need to carry a little bit of cargo, you can build trash can panniers. If you need a lot, you can get an xtracycle. I've got one, the handling is great unloaded, and better than expected when loaded.

It takes a genius like Ray Ozzie to design a spellchecker that checks email addresses and a letterhead that disappears when your email is sent to the internet.

I have to concur..I too have developed on Lotus Notes (starting with version 3) and have a friend who was a Notes-only developer; Notes is, at the end of the day, a pretty awful product. It doesn't know if it wants to be a database, document repository, email system, self-hosting app server, etc. Maybe it was ground-breaking in its day as the one-stop shop for all things networked, but it reminded me of an enterprise-level Microsoft Works or Lotus Symphony on acid; at least in Works you knew the limitations...in Notes you couldn't even *find* things you needed in the menus.

The interface was also so bad that it warrants its own page in the interface hall of shame.

I've heard Ray Ozzie speak and he reminds me a lot of Ted Nelson, of Xandau fame; lots of big ideas and grand concepts that smash into the wall of practability and useability.

This suit WAS at Nextfest 2 years ago. I know because I was there, and while they presented it as easy enough for anyone to use, when they took two volunteers, it resulted in one of the most awkward moments I've ever seen, or gotten a picture of: http://homepage.mac.com/somniac/.Pictures/nextfest 04/wussyboy2.jpg

I believe it was the rousing Ad campaign that has them sold them on Diebold voting machines

You have to assume the DoD is both smart and non-corrupt, and the evidence clearly shows that as a gestalt they are neither.

Fair enough in this specific case I suppose -- however, my comments apply to any organization, particularly any large organization (as they have more money, and thus more leverage).

By way of an example, back in 2005 I attended a Health Informatics conference in Toronto, where a colleague of mine asked a panel of self-described "doers" whether or not they had considered Open Source software. I blogged about it here. In essence, they too were treating Open Source software as if it were a product that sat on the shelf, and not as something that you, as a customer, can demand. It is interesting to note that they discussed all sorts of development and partnership problems that OSS could solve for them, however collectively their attitude was pretty much to look for an existing OSS solution to their problems, and when they didn't find one, go to a commercial developer and use whatever license that developer dictated to them.

This is where organizations are going wrong with OSS. There is nothing wrong with using a commercial developer -- just mandate that the development they do for you is licensed under an OSS license. Canada Health Infoway claimed at the time they had $1.8 billion to spend in the field.

And maybe it's just me, but the customer with $1.8 billion should be the one calling the shots. The problem isn't that they lacked the clout -- only that they lacked the knowledge to know what to ask for. They are at the whim of the development companies they contract out (which has bit these people on the butt before -- there have been a number of cases in this field where organizations have spent millions of dollars and spent years having a custom solution developed, only to find that it no longer suits their current needs (which have changed since development began), and/or won't run on their current deployment environment anymore, necessitating scrapping it and starting all over again).

Yaz.

So, how do you transfer to an OpenZaurus then? Please enlighten me, twitter. If it requires any special software, you automatically fail.

By Compact Flash or SD and any music player or program that can write to such.

You can transfer from iPod to computer using EphPod and GTKPod. You can plug your iPod into your PC without "self destructing", you either don't have iTunes installed so it won't do anything or you click the "Don't Replace" button when iTunes pops up. So long as you didn't buy your music from iTMS, you can move it around as much as you like.

That all sounds so easy.... for you. No, I don't believe you over what I read in Wikipedia and what people who own the device have told me.

Twitter, you've never used iTunes, you've never used an iPod and you are babbling on about something you only superficially know about from Wikipedia.

That's true. A brief overview of how iPod works is enough for me to not want one. People I know have failed to push the right button at the right time and had to go through a "restore" process he described as a pain in the ass. I'm not giving my money to a company that makes things hard for me and I don't need to. The briefest of google searches pulls up all sorts of problems on iPod besides trying to make it work with free software.

• Having to format the hard drive or lose battery life.
• One of many copy and restore programs, because iTunes apparently does not do what users want.
• A failed restore
• Apple's trouble shooting recommendations.

SHUT THE FUCK UP. Let people who actually know what they are talking about participate in this discussion, you go and sit in the corner and talk to yourself.

No. The discussion I started here is about how people like you reject the iTunes music store. Why don't you tell me about how cool DRM'd music is and how long you have been looking forward to it? Tell me what a cool company Apple is and how all of their stuff does exactly what you want, without modification and how happy you are with your non free iPod. No? tell me about how easy it is to work with Apple and how supportive they have been of GTKpod and others.

Let me point you here:
http://homepage.mac.com/frakes/MOSXPT/content/keyb oard.html

Applications, including the Finder (see Chapters 6 and 7)

            command+H

                    Hide current application

            command+option+H

                    Hide all other applications

            command+M

                    Minimize active window to the Dock

            command+option+M

                    Minimize all windows in active application to the Dock

            command+`

                    Cycle through current application's windows (add the shift to cycle backwards)

            command+,

                    Open application preferences dialog (not universal yet, but becoming more common)

Mmmm... Pie Pants.

No... wait. I meant Pie Pants.

Try viewing it without JavaScript (e.g. like those of us with NoScript). Look at the source -- OMG.

That now qualifies as the most atrocious use of JavaScript I've ever seen - Jesus, render this garbage on the server. Feeding some oddball marked up nonsense to the browser, yielding a circa-1997 page, seems a little...unnecessary.

This has already been done in the world of OS X:

http://homepage.mac.com/chamady/MacMiniReview

It's not manditory, and I believe it works the way most "non-geeks" would expect.

It follows the software volume setting from when you turned off your Mac.

You can also mute it by holding F3 while booting your Mac, which on any Apple keyboard has the "mute speaker" icon, which is also how you mute the speaker in software.

There are also many free utilities that can disable it for you.

I suppose using Google to search for "mac startup sound mute" and hitting I'm feeling lucky was too hard. The result is pretty clear....

http://homepage.mac.com/geerlingguy/mac_support/ma c_help/pages/0025-startup_sound.html

Here's a Quantum FireBall that caught fire:
http://homepage.mac.com/robm/PhotoAlbum10.html

I've seen 8 or 10 of these Quantum drives go up, all from the same Philips controller on the board. Maxtor drives suck, but when they inherit this kind of shitty design flaw, it's fricken criminal.

we designed our own incredibly simply shelves. we are a low budget college radio station that still plays actual CDs and vinyl, as opposed to digital files. one of our members designed these maybe 14 years ago. they allow for easy shuffling because we add about 100 CDs a week to our collection.

not sure if this is quite what you would want, but we have a zillion CDs and these shelves work well. we just keep running out of space to put more.
our shelves are basically 8 feet tall (can be as tall as the ceiling allows) and made from 1"x6" wood at whatever length. we left about 8" between shelves for filing simplicity. in our case that works. if you pull one CD to play it, you rotate the CDs next to it 90 degrees so it's quick to file after your show. that shelf spacing makes them fit DVDs perfectly. the original WKDU shelves were built 4'x8x or 2'x8' because the backerboard sheets come in standard 4x8 foot dimensions (needed for the freestanding shelves).

i have made some for my house and some friends. they would be simple to make, or have made. they literally require a saw, router and some nails or screws. they could be made with nicer wood and stained and whatever, or they can be made cheap for under $40 each 4'x8' shelf.

some pix here of my home brew version:
http://web.mac.com/johnpaul/iWeb/xjohnpaulx/Projec ts/56B6900B-020D-4A82-9E42-5C8D641E59A2.html

On some drives, like the ones my college bookstore carries, you can't access the writable portion of the drive until after the U3 software is loaded into Windows. Hell, I couldn't even get past it using my Linux laptop.

And the U3 software fails on virtually every computer on campus, because the computers are locked down in such a way that one cannot install device drivers using a normal student account.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply. I hope I didn't let a hostile tone slip into my post before. Evolution discussions rarely go well, and I often find it a struggle not to jump to the conclusion that it is *going* to be bad, and get preemptively frustrated and hostile.

The other reply to you, the one from Copid, beat me to several comments I was going to make myself. I pretty well agree with everything he said.

I (and most scientists studying it) agree that the most probable advantage of feathers was as insulation. The speed and stamina of reptiles are notoriously dependant upon body temp. Many reptiles specifically sun themselves on warm rocks to raise their body temp, a warm reptile is a far faster and far more deadly predator. (Typically sluggish crocodiles will sprint and eat you for lunch in a 20 yard dash, but will totally poop-out without completing a 60 or 70 yard dash.)

Certainly they couldn't fly, and certainly natural selection is not some intelligent force that had birds in mind for the future.

Exactly. The mutant appearance of feathers spread across the population for the sole reason that dinosaurs with feathers did better than dinosaurs without them. And from there, there is a very good explanation of why they evolved in the direction of wing-like arms and on to flight.

I'm sure you've noticed that people swing their arms fairly vigorously when running - any creature running on two legs naturally swings their arms. The arm thrusts transmit thrust through the body and increase running speed. A feathered arm that became flattened with a larger surface area would be able to actually push against the air. The more wing-like the arm became, the better it could thrust against the air and the faster the sprint would be - all the better to sprint catch prey (or to flee a predator). Once you begin going in the direction of using (and improving) arm flapping as a means to drive motion, its easy to see that going far enough in this direction eventually leads you to flight.

That is called the "Ground Up" theory of evolving flight. I think the fossil links below pretty well support that theory. There is also a second theory called "Trees down". In "Trees Down" an animal climbs a tree and simply falls. First it gains the ability to "parachute" a bit to slow its fall, then it increasingly gains the ability for longer and more controlled distance gliding, which eventually may lead to genuine upwards flight. This is likely how bats evolved to fly, and flying squirrels are a perfect example of a species in the advanced almost-level-flight gliding stage of this process. But perhaps the most striking example of "Trees Down" evolution of flight are FLYING SNAKES. (No "Snakes on a Plane" jokes please, chuckle.) Flying snakes don't actually fly, but considering that they are an entirely ordinary looking wingless snake, they have a stunning ability to glide. They fall almost straight down at first as they pick up airspeed, but then they flatten their bodies into a wing shape and glide quite well. See this video of a snake gliding to land in a target tree, this vid of a snake gliding right off the screen, and this vid of a snake actually making a 90 degree turn in mid air.

could you give me an example of a dinosaur with feathers?
Sinosauropteryx is perhaps the first such example. Other than the primative feathers, it is an otherwise entirely ordinary dinosaur with comically small arms that obviously could not be any sort of flying wing.

Then there's Caudipteryx, with well developed wing and tail feathers. Clearly a runner. The arms are bigger and better developed into a winglike form, but the arms/wings are defi

I appreciate your thoughtful reply. I hope I didn't let a hostile tone slip into my post before. Evolution discussions rarely go well, and I often find it a struggle not to jump to the conclusion that it is *going* to be bad, and get preemptively frustrated and hostile.

The other reply to you, the one from Copid, beat me to several comments I was going to make myself. I pretty well agree with everything he said.

I (and most scientists studying it) agree that the most probable advantage of feathers was as insulation. The speed and stamina of reptiles are notoriously dependant upon body temp. Many reptiles specifically sun themselves on warm rocks to raise their body temp, a warm reptile is a far faster and far more deadly predator. (Typically sluggish crocodiles will sprint and eat you for lunch in a 20 yard dash, but will totally poop-out without completing a 60 or 70 yard dash.)

Certainly they couldn't fly, and certainly natural selection is not some intelligent force that had birds in mind for the future.

Exactly. The mutant appearance of feathers spread across the population for the sole reason that dinosaurs with feathers did better than dinosaurs without them. And from there, there is a very good explanation of why they evolved in the direction of wing-like arms and on to flight.

I'm sure you've noticed that people swing their arms fairly vigorously when running - any creature running on two legs naturally swings their arms. The arm thrusts transmit thrust through the body and increase running speed. A feathered arm that became flattened with a larger surface area would be able to actually push against the air. The more wing-like the arm became, the better it could thrust against the air and the faster the sprint would be - all the better to sprint catch prey (or to flee a predator). Once you begin going in the direction of using (and improving) arm flapping as a means to drive motion, its easy to see that going far enough in this direction eventually leads you to flight.

That is called the "Ground Up" theory of evolving flight. I think the fossil links below pretty well support that theory. There is also a second theory called "Trees down". In "Trees Down" an animal climbs a tree and simply falls. First it gains the ability to "parachute" a bit to slow its fall, then it increasingly gains the ability for longer and more controlled distance gliding, which eventually may lead to genuine upwards flight. This is likely how bats evolved to fly, and flying squirrels are a perfect example of a species in the advanced almost-level-flight gliding stage of this process. But perhaps the most striking example of "Trees Down" evolution of flight are FLYING SNAKES. (No "Snakes on a Plane" jokes please, chuckle.) Flying snakes don't actually fly, but considering that they are an entirely ordinary looking wingless snake, they have a stunning ability to glide. They fall almost straight down at first as they pick up airspeed, but then they flatten their bodies into a wing shape and glide quite well. See this video of a snake gliding to land in a target tree, this vid of a snake gliding right off the screen, and this vid of a snake actually making a 90 degree turn in mid air.

could you give me an example of a dinosaur with feathers?
Sinosauropteryx is perhaps the first such example. Other than the primative feathers, it is an otherwise entirely ordinary dinosaur with comically small arms that obviously could not be any sort of flying wing.

Then there's Caudipteryx, with well developed wing and tail feathers. Clearly a runner. The arms are bigger and better developed into a winglike form, but the arms/wings are defi

I appreciate your thoughtful reply. I hope I didn't let a hostile tone slip into my post before. Evolution discussions rarely go well, and I often find it a struggle not to jump to the conclusion that it is *going* to be bad, and get preemptively frustrated and hostile.

The other reply to you, the one from Copid, beat me to several comments I was going to make myself. I pretty well agree with everything he said.

I (and most scientists studying it) agree that the most probable advantage of feathers was as insulation. The speed and stamina of reptiles are notoriously dependant upon body temp. Many reptiles specifically sun themselves on warm rocks to raise their body temp, a warm reptile is a far faster and far more deadly predator. (Typically sluggish crocodiles will sprint and eat you for lunch in a 20 yard dash, but will totally poop-out without completing a 60 or 70 yard dash.)

Certainly they couldn't fly, and certainly natural selection is not some intelligent force that had birds in mind for the future.

Exactly. The mutant appearance of feathers spread across the population for the sole reason that dinosaurs with feathers did better than dinosaurs without them. And from there, there is a very good explanation of why they evolved in the direction of wing-like arms and on to flight.

I'm sure you've noticed that people swing their arms fairly vigorously when running - any creature running on two legs naturally swings their arms. The arm thrusts transmit thrust through the body and increase running speed. A feathered arm that became flattened with a larger surface area would be able to actually push against the air. The more wing-like the arm became, the better it could thrust against the air and the faster the sprint would be - all the better to sprint catch prey (or to flee a predator). Once you begin going in the direction of using (and improving) arm flapping as a means to drive motion, its easy to see that going far enough in this direction eventually leads you to flight.

That is called the "Ground Up" theory of evolving flight. I think the fossil links below pretty well support that theory. There is also a second theory called "Trees down". In "Trees Down" an animal climbs a tree and simply falls. First it gains the ability to "parachute" a bit to slow its fall, then it increasingly gains the ability for longer and more controlled distance gliding, which eventually may lead to genuine upwards flight. This is likely how bats evolved to fly, and flying squirrels are a perfect example of a species in the advanced almost-level-flight gliding stage of this process. But perhaps the most striking example of "Trees Down" evolution of flight are FLYING SNAKES. (No "Snakes on a Plane" jokes please, chuckle.) Flying snakes don't actually fly, but considering that they are an entirely ordinary looking wingless snake, they have a stunning ability to glide. They fall almost straight down at first as they pick up airspeed, but then they flatten their bodies into a wing shape and glide quite well. See this video of a snake gliding to land in a target tree, this vid of a snake gliding right off the screen, and this vid of a snake actually making a 90 degree turn in mid air.

could you give me an example of a dinosaur with feathers?
Sinosauropteryx is perhaps the first such example. Other than the primative feathers, it is an otherwise entirely ordinary dinosaur with comically small arms that obviously could not be any sort of flying wing.

Then there's Caudipteryx, with well developed wing and tail feathers. Clearly a runner. The arms are bigger and better developed into a winglike form, but the arms/wings are defi

The Newton is dead.

Newtons never die, they just get new batteries. And then they get new hardware.

We've had two of these go.

I have a photo on our blog too:

http://homepage.mac.com/skingsley/xemaybe/C1935475 274/index.html

About 4 headlines in.

You'll notice from the blog I'm pretty much an Apple Fan Boi (tm) but even I in my Appleuphoria can see that this is a problem.

I guess the more correct term (from Googling) is "tabbed windows." Here's a screenshot of them: http://homepage.mac.com/bgreen5/.Pictures/tabs.jpg

Basically, if you drug a window to the bottom side of the screen, the title bar would turn into a tab. Then clicking the tab would pop-up the entire window, which behaved exactly like a normal Finder window. The tabs persisted across reboots (mostly, it was a bit buggy, especially with resolution changes.)

I kept all my applications in one tab and my documents in another. If I wanted to open a jpeg in Photoshop instead of GraphicConverter (the default), I could pop-open my documents folder, grab the icon, drag the icon away from the tabbed window (which disappears), hover the icon over the tab for the applications window (which opens), then drop it on the Photoshop icon. When you describe it in text, it sounds awkward... but believe me, it's brilliant.

I based my entire computer workflow around tabbed windows, and I miss it a lot. Why Apple would bring back *Labels!* of all things and not tabbed windows, I'll never know. (My guess: Finder coders are lazy, and labels were easier.)

• Introduction of the Core 2 Duo to the iNtel Mac lineup;
  • Conroe will be featured in the iMac and the new PowerMac; Quad capability may or may not be present...
  • Merom will be featured in the MacMini, the MacBook, and the MacBook Pro [evidence of meromac]
  • Woodcrest MAY be present in the next revision of the XServe and XServe RAID
• Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
  • Point releases are traditionally announced at WWDC.
  • Point releases usually accompany upgrades.
  • Conroe, Merom, and Woodcrest bring x86_64 (EM64T) support, 10.5 should take advantage of it fully.
• A bigger shift to the iMac line.
• A shift to the iPod nano line (they've been killing off stock by giving the freaking things away with new Mac purchases).
• Something less useless than the iPod Hi-Fi.

...cartoonist. No, seriously. Bill Amend of Foxtrot fame is a Physics major and is the only strip to have real, working equations and code.

Here's some pictures from Episode III that we just finished filming yesterday.

http://homepage.mac.com/tod_baudais/PhotoAlbum37.h tml

> I mean, what Mac apps would you want to run on Linux that you can't find a windows version to run on Wine or some windows emulator.

OsiriX Medical Imaging Software: http://homepage.mac.com/rossetantoine/osirix/

The code is written for MacOS X, using Cocoa I think. It is free software (GPL), but requires proprietary libraries to work.

On the converse side, frhed, a great free (GPLed) Windows hexeditor could simply not run on Linux/BSD if it weren't for the existence of a free compatability layer (wine/winelib).

Yes, Linux/BSD needs GNUStep to become a better compatability layer for OS X apps, if only for source compatability with the GPLed/etc OS X applications that exist. Yes, re-implementation is important for Linux/BSD - witness GNU Classpath and all that free java, witness osflash.org, witness wine/winelib, witness octave (matlab thing). Free sofware/open source *cannot* afford to ignore proprietary APIs and to some extent ABIs (mainly to bring people closer to Linux/BSD).

For those who want to pay for MacOS X, there is always Mac-On-Linux, but obviously that still ties you to non-free software (as well as Linux).

No, you've missed the point entirely. This is not a case where you can treat "revolution" as a synonym of "singularity". They really are talking about something that is more equivalent to a divide by zero.

Consider the major "paradigm shifts" in the history of life on this planet, where I use that phrase rather broadly. The first self-replicating molecule was the first paradigm shift. A long time later we get primitive cells. A shorter time interval later (but still a long time) we get multicellular creatures. And so on until we have paradigm shift events that are things like mammals, primates, humanoids, homo sapiens, stone tools, iron tools, printing press, telephones, computers, internet. If you look at the amount of time that elapses between each successive paradim shift, you see that each time the interval is shorter. We live in an era where the intervals are now measured in a few years, and very soon now the intervals will be measured months, as we start making leaps in the ability to create true machine intelligence. When we then reach the point where the machine intelligence is smarter than the humans that designed it, and has access to all of the worlds knowledge, look out! The intervals between paradigm shifts might become measured in days, and then in seconds. That is what is meant by "singularity".

All of this is spelled out in much detail (and I might add some very wild speculation) by Ray Kurzweil in The Singularity is Near. There are some plots on pages 17-20 of that book that are my source for the above description. I did a google search today and found a powerpoint deck that has a slide with a similar plot. I'm obfuscating the link so that govis.org.nz isn't slashdotted:
www.govis.org.nz/conference2002/presentations/mark -fowler.ppt

I've pulled that one slide as a .pdf and made it available. I think homepage.mac.com can probably handle the slashdotting. :)
http://homepage.mac.com/jim.lloyd/CountdownToSingu larity.pdf

That sounds like a good idea. And now, I'm going to insult you for your supposed promiscuity while wishing you a safe trip.

Take care, ho!

AppKiDo is invaluable if you're a Cocoa programmer.

Here's what I know of and/or could find for the ones I didn't.

• Aaron Hillegas
• Adam & Tonya Engst
• Amit Singh
• Andrina Kelly
• Andy Ihnatko
• Ben Wilson
• Brent Simmons
• Dan Frakes
• Danny Goodman
• David Pogue
• Drunkenbatman
• John Gruber
• John Siracusa
• Jonathan "Wolf" Rentzsch
• Josh Wisenbaker
• Michael Bartosh
• Mike Breeden
• Nigel Kersten
• Ray Barber
• Ric Ford
• Rich Siegel (Bare Bones SW)
• Rob Griffiths
• Rosyna Keller
• Scott Knaster
• Wil Shipley (Delicious Monster)

Unfortunately, it seems that Slashdot has a limitation on the minimum number of characters per line. So I can't just create a nice, simple list, but instead need a significant amount of text to pad out the list, so that I can make it past the filters being used. But I'm still not there yet... sooner or later I will (20.4 is still too few). I'm probably going to have to type a whole lot of crap in here just to deal with the 25 names that are only a few characters each. (and I tried removing returns from the message, but it didn't seem to help at all)

"What I find unfortunate is that DHS can't win. "

I think it's a little early for you to come to this conclusion.

"If they send out any kind of alert and nothing happens, they overreacted (even if there was a real threat and the perps simply scratched their mission once they were exposed.). "

If you look at a timeline of terror alerts, they all seem to coincide with the release of news that was damaging to the Bush administration.

"If they don't send an alert and something happens, they take the blame for that. "

Has that actually happened (yet)? That's why I say it is perhaps too early for you to say that they can't win.

"If they use it to send out emergency information on a hurricane bearing down on New Orleans... well, they won't do that right, because you believe this tech will only be used for political gain (though TFA says it may be used for natural disasters)."

Did they issue such a warning for hurricane Katrina? I honestly don't recall if they did. If they did, kudos to them.

If this is a tech that can be used for good or evil, based on historical evidence, I think the Bush administration will use it for evil.

What do you mean? It isn't like there is a whole section of the User Interface Hall of Shame dedicated entirely to Lotus Notes...

Oh... wait. I've used Notes from 4.5 through the current version... just remember - Notes is a database interaction UI that happens to allow e-mail as a side-effect.

What do you mean? It isn't like there is a whole section of the User Interface Hall of Shame dedicated entirely to Lotus Notes...

Oh... wait. I've used Notes from 4.5 through the current version... just remember - Notes is a database interaction UI that happens to allow e-mail as a side-effect.

My friend invented a flapping paper airplane 20+ years ago in junior high. Of course it's not nearly the same, since it reacts to pressure fluctuations instead of creating them. There are (pdf) instructions so anyone can be an ornithoptrix.

Cool.
I'm sure IBM is not showing us everything, (wink, wink) what they do for the DoD, NSA and the rest of the alphabet, I'm sure would give us nightmares.

(Laboratory for Telecommunications Sciences (LTS) -programs continue to emphasize transmission of quantum communications through optical elements.
Quantum communications, quality of service, and high- speed network interfaces)

http://www.er.doe.gov/ascr/NITRD05supplement.pdf

August 19, 2002
IBM, RIM Drafted By Defense Department

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/1 448711

"Big Blue Monday said its AIX 5L was the first UNIX operating system certified by the DoD to run COE Version 4 (Common Operating Environment), a user interface which utilizes the same commands regardless of what operating system is running on the server."

Fun huh?

VMware: US military staff and do not recommend VMware for secure environment:

http://www.cs.nps.navy.mil/people/faculty/irvine/p ublications/2000/VMM-usenix00-0611.pdf

Apple's foray in DOS add-on cards

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=112 244

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadra_610

http://www.ralentz.com/old/mac/faqs/source/houdini .html

http://homepage.mac.com/olivers/DOScard/DOScard.ht ml

http://lowendmac.com/archive/06/0407.html

It can become cheap, once enough people go for it. I'm surprised at how many naysayers are on this forum, possibly conditioned to believe that spiderman villains are villainous because they didn't get their superpowers "naturally".

There may be benefits to complete prosthetic bodies which have capabilities superior to flesh and blood which would make limb regeneration a less preferred alternative.

In the article Jeffrey Morgan notes that students at Brown have pierced noses. Limbs and skins impervious to flame, cold, bullets and infection might be the next big thing in body modification. Also, if you break your leg, you can take it down to the shop and get it fixed while the mechanic loans you a courtesy leg to get around in.

As for concerns to losing your humanity, it's not who you are inside, but what you do that counts.

Finally, is it just me, or does everyone want to strap on a combination of the Hugh Herr Catapult and the german built Powerskip mechanical jumping boot and go street racing?

Now now. THAT would violate Slashdot Rule #4. :-)
But as a tease . . . http://idisk.mac.com/thorw/Public/IronButt.jpg

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

...there's a printer friendly version with the entire article on one page, so you don't have to click through 458 different pages, each with its own half-sentence of the article on it.

I'd also note that Apple's .Mac service is missing. It provides AFP, WebDAV, and web-based access for Mac (and Windows) users, as well as online file storage, online file, calendar, mail, and preference syncing, online backup, and the normal collection of web and email services.

If you want to see some of Apples product roadmap 3-5 years ahead then you should check out a rumors forum or cringelys website hes usually about that far ahead in his predication or a mac hypotheical site like http://web.mac.com/hegsie/iWeb/Site/What%20if/What %20if.html which also has some really crazy thoughts on it.