Slashdot Mirror

Checkout the article by Wired ( http://wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,69234,00.htm l?tw=wn_tophead_3 ) where they talk about the "wireless cloud that stretches over 700 square miles of landscape so dry and desolate it could have been lifted from a cowboy tune." where "Ziari is recovering the investment through contracts with more than 30 city and county agencies, as well as big farms such as Hale's, whose onion empire supplies over two-thirds of the red onions used by the Subway sandwich chain." that has made uses with "both short-range Wi-Fi signals and a version of a related, longer-range technology known as WiMax."

Really just plain ads?

Or will they take advantage of the new mandatory wiretapping laws, and have automated systems that scan your conversation for keywords and give you related ads?

Sort of like Google adsense, but with voice content...

I for one do not welcome our new phone tapping overlords...

Someone should point out that the U.S. hardly seems like a country and culture that champions free speech.

Protesters are placed in "free speech zones" (nice euphemism!) where they will not be seen on TV
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/04/hilden.freespeec h/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MB81.DTL

A high-school student who made a political poster got a visit from the secret service (they confiscated the poster)
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170992_prosser 28.html

Police, FBI, and Homeland security frequently target and harrass protesters
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_sues_Homeland_S ecurity_for_arresting_spying_on_vegans_who_protest ed_0922.html
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc1021a04.htm l

The FBI defines peace groups as "terrorists"
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_reveals_FBI_lab eled_peace_affirmative_action_group_terrori_0829.h tml

An Ohio paper did not print some story for fear of being jailed.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/artic le_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000976374

The government has misrepresented and altered the conclusions of scientific panels on global warming and other issues.
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62339,00. html

Officials how have an unpopular (but true) message are fired (numerous), their wives are targeted (Plame), etc.

The BBC says the "embedded journalist" restrictions on the Iraq calls into question the credibility of Americas media
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/ 20030425/media_nm/iraq_media_bbc_dc_4

People were excluded from church for being of the wrong party.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/church_politics

Airline passengers who ask questions are targeted
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&u=/ ap/20040317/ap_on_go_coairline_passenger_screening _3&printer=1

The US has a history of killing non-US journalists in Iraq...so many times that it's getting hard to believe it's not intentional.

People wearing anti-Bush T-shirts arrested
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/08/21/heckler.fir ed.ap/index.html

Teachers Evicted From Bush Event for Wearing 'Protect Our Civil Liberties' T-Shirts.
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc101604.htm

Someone wearing an anti-Bush T-shirt was kicked off a Southwest plane.

and so on...

Certainly, America is not as bad off as Saudi Arabia, but that's not saying much.
This is not a country we can trust to safeguard free speech on the internet.

I think Americans only u

well, if you're using the heat to say, keep your boiler full of hot water, and the electricity to run your PC, tv, stereo, microwave, etc etc.. i'm pretty sure the system can be prototyped to being 97-98% efficient in terms of the energy 'being' used.. and keep in mind there are huge fields of frozen natural gas at the bottom of the worlds oceans... http://www.wired.com/news/planet/0,2782,66925,00.h tml
even if say, we could use a billion cubic feet of natural gas a year, the oceans are estimated to have reserves 200,000 times larger than that.

hrm.. i came into a little snag though, when looking up natural gas production for the united states it looked like about 2,000,000 cuft of the stuff is being produced monthly now. but then at the top it said (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) which made me wonder, was that an error on the doe website? or is america Really producing 2,000,000,000,000 cuft of natural gas a month already? in which case 200,000,000,000,000 of reserves on the ocean is a hundred month supply? it's either a hundred million month supply or a 100 month supply, anything like this vehicle that increased consumption would say cut that down to say maybe a 1-200,000 year supply, or a few year, depending on if A. the DOE site is confused the hell out of what 'measured in millions of cuft' means, or we're already using 2 trillion cuft of natural gas a month...

I think they meant 60Km radius which would equate to 120Km diameter.

If I remember circular area as Pi * r(squared) , then it is roughly 11,300 sq Km.

One over a Metropolis could cover it all.

22 would cover the Sq Km of the UK except the patterns are circular, and thus would
have to partially overlap to provide total coverage.

Thus most likely doable with less than 33 of them .

And it is alot cheaper than some satellite projects that have been posited .

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,12464, 00.html

Teledesic, Iridium, and others cannot compete with this on a cost to repair basis alone.

The balloons by www.21stcenturyairships.com can be launched and landed by remote control.

Serviced by a field tech with a pick-up, No rockets, no astronomical budget.

They might even be cheaper than building towers just due to topographical terrain signal outage reasons.

Ex-MislTech

No matter what you say about Bush's DoJ coming down on porn offices, how many actually think it would hold up in court? I submit that no Judge in this nation would restrict speech in such a way, with the exception of kiddie porn and snuff films.

Oh, there's something far more horrific than kiddie porn and snuff films that the USA will clamp down on free speech for. Copyright infringement! I already posted the link elsewhere in this thread, but here I go again: 2600 loses appeal.

To be perfectly honest, quoting from your consitution proves nothing. Your courts and lawmakers have made it abundantly clear that they will not abide by it, and your fellow citizens have made it abundantly clear that they don't care. Just because it says you have freedom of speech on a piece of paper, that doesn't mean it's true.

I find it horrifying that you think that EVERY nation should have a democractic say in the administration of the internet -- including countries that already, today, censor the internet for the 'good of their citizens'.

You mean like how the USA passed a law that forced Google to remove links to anti-Scientology websites? How like how USA courts forced 2600 to stop linking to a website that had code that allowed people to watch their own DVDs?

What's the matter with letting China et al have a say, anyway? You seem to be equating "can voice an opinion and has a vote in how things are run" with "can take control whenever they want". That's ludicrous.

Or by "control" are you talking about the fact that it's being managed by a group who make logistical decisions that I could care less about

Why on earth should what you care about be a factor in this?

And it's couldn't care less. You sound like a fucking idiot when you get it wrong.

The WIRED story is here. It is more indepth then the WSJ article.

I'm not usually one to complain about the age of articles on Slashdot, but I first read about the Long Now project in a Wired cover story published in 1998. Perhaps the article submitter didn't know about it until now, but this is far from a new project.

Some have mentioned it but here is a screenshot of their NORMAL broadcast:
http://www.w3.org/Talks/1999/0512-tvweb-www8/IMG06 .JPG

Oddly enough there was an interesting article about CNN's "Situation Room" with video walls and such. They talk about how the producer wanted to be like a war room in the White House or Pentagon or some such nonsense. Essentially this article discusses exactly your point.

Here is the link:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,68859,00 .html

Baseball tried something similar. They decided a few years ago that they'd use a computer system (Questec) to "grade" umpires' strike zone accuracy, and then tie the grading to personnel decisions.

The system works by lining up tracking devices/cameras around a predetermined zone. Big problem. The strike zone is defined "from the bottom of the batter's knees to the midpoint between his shoulders and belt as he stands in a habitual crouch." This varies from batter to batter, it varies by the batter's stance; it can't be predetermined. Even instantaneously, it's a judgement call when a 90+ mph pitch is passing by. Then there's the matter that the strike zone is meant to be called as the ball goes over the plate. The strike zone isn't a plane at the front of the plate like many casual fans think. It's a solid volume floating above the pentagonal home plate. When pitchers are throwing good curveballs and sliders, that's very tough to get right, even for a machine.

When the system first came out, it was only in a handful of parks (7? out of 30). Umpires immediately tried to adapt to the system, trying to predict what their zone needed to be to agree with often-flawed calibrations. Games in those parks were way out of the norm for awhile. Players threw tantrums (and Curt Schilling actually broke a machine) protesting the system. Now the system is in many more parks (~23) and the system is no longer in the spotlight. I believe the umps actually negotiated on what the system could and couldn't be used for (ie, personnel decisions) in their last labor agreement.

There's an editorial from the original roll-out at http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,59284, 00.html, and an inside view from an operator at http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti cleid=3326 (not sure if this is a premium article, if you can't get to it sorry)

I think it is more than a casual reference. The beauty and danger of Wikipedia is that anyone can update the content. I would contend that this model is better than any encyclopaedia where relatively few people contribute or review content.

There are many specialists on any particular subject and in the Wikipedia model these individuals can update the site to contain relevant and accurate information. Everyone get to peer review the information. It's the long tail for information.

Making it open and accessible actually improves the overall breadth and quality. It is counter intuitive and many people have been unable to grasp this concept with open source projects.

One way to break into games and earn a living is to build a small team and develop for a new market such as cell phones.

During the early '90s, shareware authors focused on creating games for the newly-popular desktop PCs. That's much tougher nowadays, due to direct competition from untold thousands of shareware developers and the larger studios. During the late '90s, Palm OS and Pocket PC popped up (another new market). At that time, it was possible to spend a week or two of development on a simple-but-enjoyable PDA puzzle game with a grossly disproportionate number of sales (with respect to development costs) during the first few months, and a decent long tail a year or two out.

These days, the buzz seems to be around casual/cell phone games, on the basis that a) it doesn't take [as] much to develop a cellphone game, and b) there are many millions of cellphone users. Java isn't my cup of tea(!), but J2ME offers individual developers and small teams a way to develop content for the myriad mobile platforms.
_________________________
www.dejobaan.com

According to Jon Katz he didn't say it. Which seems to me a pretty good indication he did say it.

I can't believe this was modded Interesting - it's totally wrong. Have a look at the size of the PayPalSucks forums to get an idea of what I mean - size alone should give you an idea of what you're dealing with here.

Then go read one of their draconian user agreements, the ex-employee/whistleblower interviews (PayPalSucks and elsewhere), and maybe something like this. Or just google it?

I was ripped off myself - thankfully only for US$2.50 - for the crime of living outside the US and sending verification papers a month too slow. I logged in one day to find my account locked before even the first transaction, with big red bold text to the effect of "bugger off, we don't want your money". I made several calls to get it working again before finding PayPalSucks, but couldn't be bothered spending any more time fighting their obfuscation-fu. I'd suggest my case was more incompetence than malice, but I've seen (firsthand) much worse.

No offense meant, but please do a little research before making such sweeping claims. It's really annoying to see someone sing their praises after watching them get away with the kind of shit that they do.

An article in Wired says:

Missouri expects to spend less than $3 million a year on the service, Rahn said, although the exact price won't be known until the contract is finalized. Maryland is spending $1.9 million, although the entire Baltimore project costs nearly $5.6 million, said Mike Zezeski, director of real-time traffic operations for the Maryland Department of Transportation.

By contrast, the San Francisco Bay area spent about $35 million over several years to install roadside scanners and develop computer programs, websites and call centers for a real-time traffic service based on electronic toll passes, said Randy Rentschler, a spokesman for the region's Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

The same service is offered in Houston: Houston TranStar. It can be downloaded onto a web-enabled phone.

The data is also provided to XM Radio, who offers it for car navigation systems that can display it on the screen in real-time: http://www.xmradio.com/xmnavtraffic/.

My Acura RL has this feature, and I wish that they would implement some form of this in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area.

After some thought, most reasonable people conclude that the current method of taxing gasoline works better. It's anonymous. It's cheap and easy because prices must be computed per gallon when you sell gasoline anyway. It taxes you for how much you drive and imposes no burden on those who don't use the roads.

Why do some government officials love the Big Brother way? The greedy ones realize you can squeeze much more out of people if you charge them differential rates they are unaware of. I'll bet most of you pay more for telco than you do for gasoline and roads, yet roads are more expensive to maintain than coper wires or fibers. The invasive ones realize they can track their perceived enemies. Both of these principles are in full swing in the UK, where the camera networks track people and charge those who drive downtown at the right time of day or speed. The camera networks were built to, yes you guessed it, "fight terrorism" and have manifestly failed at that. To get their wishes, they are willing to create a whole new infrastructure - the black boxes mentioned in the above link. The trade magazines were full of shine on about revenue maximization that hinted at tracking abilities.

The wired article points to some of the privacy concerns and shows that public officials are now aware of the issue and have to lie around it. The fact of the matter is that your cell phone can already be used to track you and that our sorry laws let that happen without much trouble or notice. Better laws would require the destruction of all data not required for billing, the destruction of that after payment and all the usual constitutional requirements to obtain so much as that. Individual tracking tools are too abusive to be allowed for people who are not convicted fellons.

a Wired article appears...

Anyone remember how a diplomat was murdered over these scams?

While the Harry Potter style pictures mentioned in the article sound cool, a low power, lightweight ebook reader could conceivably change publishing for the better. Maybe after high end advertising subsidizes the development of the technology enough, someone will release an environmentally conscious magazine format that can be refilled RSS style.

Since the pages only need to be powered when their updated, solar power might not be completely unrealistic. Would definitely face hurdles with the pulping industry . . .

Just another example of "one more thing" marketing as discussed, say, here: http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,69172,00 .html?tw=rss.TOP.

I wonder -- is preaching to the converted really sustainable though?

Wake up friend. Ask yourself that same thing about the nuclear power industry and China ...http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/china. html Why India and China? They dont have corporations that have investments in an existing infrastructure that will pay off politicians to slow down or make illegal new technologies.

I think he's referring to Rodney Brooks. Along with much of the robotics community, Tilden was heavily influenced by Brooks in the late 80s (see this article). Brooks preached an approach of building and evolving robot designs, starting with simple "insects" first. Tilden has taken the simple-only approach a bit further than anyone else though, and remains pretty controversial in his ideas.

Taking you back to the old school, Clan PMS-style:

http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,188 5,00.html

(1997, even!)

The reason that government users would still be allowed to use the BB network is that one of the provisions of a US Patent is that the government automatically gets the right to use the patented invention royalty-free. This right also devolves to government contractors as it pertains to producing goods and services for the government. There was a similar case involving Lucent using a patented method to produce a fiber optic junction for the Navy. When the patent holder tried to get royalties, Lucent told them to go spit.

"But Xbox games have come close. Steel Battalion looked stunning and Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory looked even better. The PS2 demos looked even better, showing facial detail that I'm not even sure we'll see in the next generation."

WTF? The PS2 demos looked better than things we'll see in the next gen?! Can I have what you're smoking? You need to look back at the PS2 demos and point out to us exactly where this phenominal facial detail was! FFX, God of War, Killzone, GT4, etc. blow away those demos, which look like trash today.

"What free MMORPGs? True Fantasy Live was all I've ever heard of in that department, and it was never planned to be free."

Yes, it was (no monthly fee).

"Downloadable game demos? Well we got levels, but demos are the developer's and publisher's call. They just didn't want to."

So? How does that change the fact that MS promised them but they didn't come?

"With what support? People try to make comments about the 360, ignoring that the PS2's HDD solution fell flat on its face."

This is hilarious. You first claim that it's not Microsoft's fault that developers did not issue game demos via xbox live, but then slam sony's developers for not utilizing the hard drive? Not that that's fair to sony, since i don't recall them ever claiming that every ps2 game would support the hdd, while MS could have easily posted game demos that were already being released on CD.

"Again, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory looks MUCH better than Toy Story. I won't say the same for The Incredibles or Finding Nemo, but Toy Story's been easily met. Also, I've only heard those claims regarding PS2 previews."

If you believe that Splinter Cell looks better (from a technical standpoint) than toy story then I'm afraid the only thing I can offer you is advice to see an optometrist. Here's some shots from toy story just as an example:

http://www.kefk.net/Film/Filme/T/o/Toy.Story/Abbil dungen/0004.JPG
http://www.kefk.net/Film/Filme/T/o/Toy.Story/Abbil dungen/0009.JPG
http://www.kefk.net/Film/Filme/T/o/Toy.Story/Abbil dungen/0001.JPG

"Also, I've only heard those claims regarding PS2 previews."

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+got+game+Xbox+unveil ed/2100-1040_3-250632.html
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,40970, 00.html?tw=wn_story_related

Really Slashdot? How interesting. I wonder when the next review is due... Right now? Ya don't say! And comments are due by Dec 1, 2005!? Well fancy that. Certainly some kind souls out there must have submitted this information as a story. I wonder why we aren't reading about it? Ahhh, door handles of the future, I see. That's much more important. THAT is 'stuff that matters' I tell ya. Well, if anyone is still interested after reading about said door handles... here are some other interesting links regarding the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions:

• Lexmark brings DMCA lawsuit against SCC for refilling Lexmark printer cartridges.
• SCC brings lawsuit against ISV for refilling Lexmark printer cartidges after beating the same rap itself in the Lexmark case.
• Makers of universal garage door remotes slapped with DMCA lawsuit.
• Robot dog modders threated with DMCA.
• Mobile phone services stifling competition with DMCA.

Hmm... looks like the DMCA is being used to make lawyers rich and stomp on innovation and competition. And to think, I thought copyright was about 'promoting progress.' Silly me.

power lines

The amish generally frown on power lines heading to the home as well.

referring to Mennonites, not Amish

I most definitely am not.

have never seen one with a cell phone

Why don't you go down there and ask?

forget electricity

Oh really?

I don't think I need to go over the rest of your post - you should really read up about what you're talking about before you respond.

Yuoor Reeghts Oonleene-a: Zee Ergooment fur Creckeble-a Medeea

Pusted by Zunk oon Setoordey Ooctuber 08, @06:45PM
frum zee mekeeng-sufftvere-a-vurk-fur-yuoo dept.

roobberbundu vreetes "Vured is roonneeng a stury ebooot hoo zee US Cupyreeght Ooffffeece-a is luukeeng fur inpoot ebooot a lev thet veell elloo sume-a medeea tu be-a legelly crecked. Thees is eeemed et certeeen uses sooch es creckeeng un ibouk su thet a bleend persun cun use-a reedeeng sufftvere-a veet it und oolder sufftvere-a thet reqooures a herdvere-a dungle-a thet nu lunger vurks." Frum zee erticle-a: "Zee DMCA furbeeds creckeeng ooff cupy-prutected oor eecrypted deegitel medeea, veet certeeen ixcepshuns. Vhee zee lev ves pessed, Cungress mundeted zee regeester ooff cupyreeghts refeesit zee unti-curcoomfenshun secshun ifery three-a yeers tu meke-a soore-a cunsoomers hefe-a pruper eccess tu metereeels zeey poorchesed -- ifee iff cuntent creeturs hefe-a zeem lucked doon. Iff zee cupyreeght ooffffeece-a feends instunces vhere-a cupy prutecshun prefents feur use-a ooff zee vurk, zeen thuse-a cupy prutecshuns cun be-a legelly curcoomfented." Ve-a repurted oon zee oozeer seede-a ooff zee cueen yesterdey. Bork Bork Bork!

I hate Sony's content arm and related DRM crap as much as anybody. But Sony is big. And some parts of Sony do innovate. Even the much-hated here Minidisc, sure it's DRM, but you have to consider the times: 1991. It was the only portable, recordable digital media around. And the players were tiny. Next to them, any walkman or discman looked like the dinosaurs they were. It was not until iPod in 2001 that MD was dethroned in my view.

Also take a look at the subnotebook market. Put the two side by side - Sony and Dell. One is designed, but, dude, you're getting the other one.

Now, to address your boycott proposal. The fact is Sony makes more money from content than they do from hardware. So they are effectively subsidizing engineering R&D with content sales. Because content is more profitable, it gets more votes in the board room. This usually results in sabotaging their own products with DRM. Wired had a great feature called Civil War Inside Sony. I don't see how boycotting Sony's engineering products would help their engineers win that war.

A soldier in the desert needs about 20 gallons of water a day,

Twenty gallons a day? I think not. That's a typo. They'd have to drink almost seven pints an hour over a 24 hour period. This article seems more reasonable in saying they need 3 or 4 gallons a day. The article says two gallons of diesel produce 1 gallon of water chock full of sulfer, benzene, and soot. Yum! Why not just fit the soldiers with Dune style stillsuits? They can drink their recycled pee and sweat. Yum!

Link to Boucher's quote: http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,67853,00.html

Rick Boucher seems pretty smart about the issues and seems to be on our side until he repeats the same industry bullshit lie, namely that "the only way that I think we are going to have high-value television programming delivered over the air in digital format is if the motion picture industry has some level of confidence that it's not going to get recorded and uploaded to the internet."

That is PURE bullshit for one simple reason: Broadcasters ARE currently delivering "high-value" content in HD format "over the air"!!!! You can't say that broadcasters won't do something unless we take action, WHEN THEY ARE FUCKING DOING IT RIGHT NOW!!!

That bullshit lie is just a ploy to get broadcast flags in place to make sure we have absolutely no fair use rights left.

No chilling effects? How much money did that Lexmark case cost Static Control? Could you personally afford to fight Lexmark in court? No, I didn't think so. So you think DMCA precedent was set in the Lexmark v. SCC case? Then why is SCC now suing ISV for doing the exact same thing? Here's a clue, the law is a sham. It forces out smaller players who can stand up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in court costs. THAT is a chilling effect on innovation and Rick Boucher is on of the few people on the hill I don't consider to be an absolute slime ball.

The Library of Congress is soliciting feedback on the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions again. Without doubt, they have heard it all before, but with this particular piece of legislation, the complaints bear repeating. Since that time, the DMCA anti-circumvention clauses have been used against manufacturers of garage door openers, against owners of robot dogs, and to stifle competition in the mobile phone service market just to name a few. You have until December 1, 2005 to submit your written comments.

The Supreme Court changed the rules and the RIAA is trying to use it to prop up their broken business model. As Lawrence Lessig observes, the old rule was that a technology was okay if it had "significant non-infringing uses." But, in the Grokster ruling, they ruled that Grokster was illegal because it was the service was "promoting" infringement. The RIAA apparently figures this is their license to go after any technology which does not promote their business model.

I subscribed starting with issue #3, and bagged it sometime around 1997 or 1998. Too much of the ridiculous libertarian ethos, too many profiles of CEOs (as others have said), too much gushing over ephemeral trends. I can't remember when I thought the magazine had finally jumped the shark, but surely the Zippies cover and accompanying article http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/covers1994.html was a true, frog-in-the-well bit of embarassment, both for the magazine and the person (i.e., me) who had to lug that stupid thing around on the trains for a week. Tunnel vision, indeed. I picked up the John Stewart cover issue while traveling last month--first issue I've bought in many years. Being part of Conde Nast hasn't done much of anything for the magazine content-wise, and it seems to have declined, in fact. None of the frisson of the first couple of years, barring a stupid geek cover or two.

By the way, O'Reilly misunderstands the quote he offers from Wallace Stevens early on in the article. It's not the YES that cannot be broken, it's the PASSION for the yes that cannot be broken. A bit subtle, and it seems like he basically understands the thrust of Stevens' comment anyway, but let's get it right, shall we?

The Library of Congress is soliciting feedback on the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions again. Without doubt, they have heard it all before, but with this particular piece of legislation, the complaints bear repeating. Since that time, the DMCA anti-circumvention clauses have been used against manufacturers of of printer cartridges and garage door openers, against owners of robot dogs and to stifle competition in the mobile phone service market just to name a few. You have until December 1, 2005 to submit your written comments, so hop to it.

"If there's one general precept of security policy that is universally true, it is that security works best when the entity that is in the best position to mitigate the risk is responsible for that risk. Making financial institutions responsible for losses due to phishing and identity theft is the only way to deal with the problem". Bruce Schneier, A Real Remedy for Phishers

wired had a great article about this a while back - they call it the long tail essentially it argues that companies can make as much money on obscure titles as they can on hits.

OK, they aren't "single-play," but disposable DVD's have been around for YEARS. This was the first hit on Google:

wired news, 2003

I saw these for sale in a convinience store (Circle-K) TWO YEARS AGO. I haven't seen (noticed?) them lately, so they certainly didn't blow up in sales, but for heaven's sake: what are all of you smoking! Doesn't anybody read? (I'm not even talking about the article, I'm talking about tech news in general!) You guys call yourselves nerds? I can't believe all of these people are "up in arms" about a product that's been around and already failed in the marketplace. The only "hoax" is the idea that it was Microsoft; in fact, it was the arguably equally evil Disney that came up with this one.

Because it has recognized talent and some big-name backers behind it?

I can understand a healthy amount of skepticism about this system, but some of the comments here have gone beyond "healthy amount" into Sad Bitter Monkey territory. The web page isn't that bad, although it's certainly not that good. If you look at the "About" page you'll see the look they're presumably really trying for, though, and it's hardly a work of eye-bleeding terror.

And, enough with the accusations of stealing from Firefox. Most articles other than Business Week's, like this and this and this, refer to it as being Mozilla-based. This isn't a shell game. They're not hiding anything. Wait until they actually, oh, release the damn browser before whining about MPL violations.

I'm not really sure I'm interested in Flock, given its "social browser" focus, but I think they're on the right track: the new frontiers in web browsing aren't rendering. Sure, there's work to be done in improving engines to be fully compliant with W3C standards, and in keeping up with new standards as they happen, but the most interesting browser out there right now is the Mac-nly OmniWeb, and that's entirely because of its UI innovations. It does stuff other browsers don't do.

So c'mon, guys. Put a sock in the hip "they're out to scam you" cynicism for just a bit. Their business model may prove non-existent, the company may be a flash in the pan, but all the evidence suggests that they're sincere in trying to do some cool stuff in a new Gecko browser. More power to 'em.

According to this Wired article, it is being developed by Bart Decrem, who they state is a member of the Mozilla Foundation.

Wired states (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68823 ,00.html) that it's based off of Firefox. It is even developed by a member of the Mozilla Foundation. So perhaps a better question to ask would be, Is this browser meant to compete directly with Firefox and Seamonkey?

Wired says it is based on firefox;http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,128 2,68823,00.html?tw=rss.TOP

Scientific American had an article about 15 years ago on this.

Wired has a good article on this:
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,65035,00.ht ml

I guess the nerds here and at Newsweek don't get out much. Applied Minds and Babble, their product for Herman Miller, were featured in a June 21st Wired News article (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,67951 ,00.html). It was subsequently featured on a couple of TV news magazine shows where the demo was somewhat underwhelming....

Yes, Kurzweil has the uber tech credentials to lend legitimacy to his predicting endeavors. However, He ignores many, many aspects of our current reality that will definitely impinge his utopian dreamworld.

First off, the current fossil fuel based economy needs to be quickly and with as little disruption as possible, moved to a new and low polluting fuel. For the business side of his predictions to take place, this will have to be addressed. There are plenty of opinions about this, including this one:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0871 138883/qid=1128375836/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002- 2835979-1699208?v=glance&s=books

Perhaps we could look at what many biologists are saying is only a matter of time. A world pandemic, similar to what happened in 1918.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385 479565/qid=1128376027/sr=5-3/ref=cm_lm_asin/002-28 35979-1699208?v=glance

Last but not least, when technology gets to the point of enabling humans to live several hundred years, who gets to enjoy such benefits?

No, I think a combination of Kurzweils book and Bill Joys Why the future doesn't need us is more likely.


Let's not forget Murphys Law...

Do you really WANT to live 300 years?

Yes. I'd like to live 3 million. Heck, as long as I'm not alone after universal heat death, I'd be happy to live forever. Easy enough question. :)

each decade is compounded by more health problems

Which eventually kill you (or are symptoms of other effects that eventually lead to your death). If you're living for prolongued periods of time, those health problems are obviously being addressed.

every body part wears out with time

Then replace or regrow.

Amazing what's already out there already in the lab, isn't it?

If you can't live it up in the first 70 years

It may surprise you to learn that A) many of us aspire to much more than "living it up", and B) there are many kinds of "living it up" that the average person not born to a billionare/who doesn't become a billionare can't do in 70 years.

As for the former, I write software for fun. I can produce it at a finite rate. I see years tick by on projects. I also like to write (as in literature), make artwork, and tinker with "physical" devices. I want to raise a child or two as well. It is doubtful that in 70 years I could finish everything that I want to accomplish *thusfar*, let alone that I will come up with in the rest of my life.

Wired carried an article a few months back on Applied Minds. It's funny that the article likens Hillis to Willy Wonka, so you're probably not the only person that got that impression. ;-)

Wow! Go Slashdot! I've never seen this before: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,65688,00. html/.

After being dropped by Reprise records in 2001, Wilco offered Yankee Hotel Foxtrot for download and streaming both before it was mastered and once it was completely wrapped up. Then, they turned around and sold it to Nonesuch records (_after_ it had already been free to download for a few months) and had their biggest album to date. With their next album, A Ghost Is Born (2004), they did the same thing (minus getting dropped from their label), and once again had their biggest album to date.

Oh, and for both those albums they released download only EPs of ~5 songs you could download once you purchased the CD.

I think calling this an "experiement" might be a little outdated. Wilco ain't exactly a no-name band either.