Dude. If you don't need to have it in your pocket, you can get the 15c in software (using an emulator, but it's official HP ROM) for free. Looks and feels exactly the same, you just need to use your keyboard or mouse for input.
You can also get the 16c (I have them both). And for $9, you can get the HP 54g from the Apple app store, again with official HP ROM.
By the way, I also have the HP 15c and 16c in software, both also excellent for the tasks for which they are designed. These are open source emulations, not from the Apple app store, but again they use the actual HP ROMs.
You might have to do a bit of hunting to find those.
Despite HP's statement long ago that they were getting out of the calculator business, they did release a color graphing calculator 4 or 5 years back, give or take. I don't remember the model number. I saw the actual product in Office Depot.
Sales were a flop. People considered the color feature to be an unnecessary toy and unjustified expense.
But if you are running OS X, you can get a virtual HP 48 or 54g, complete with actual, official (courtesy of HP) firmware, running in an emulator, for only $9. (Not a typo... that's less than 10.) At the OS X app store. Looks and works exactly like a 54g. (Or 48, if you like that one better.) It's called "Emu48" but it does both 48 and the 54g.
I don't think it's on iOS, which would be cool, but I think it would probably strain the device's resources.
Since I have need of a good programmable, higher-math-capable calculator at times, but don't need (or want) to carry one in my pocket, this was ideal for me. It's an incredible value.
Pardon again. I'm not being sarcastic, just incredulous. But I made an error. "whether someone 'believes the police told him'" should be "whether someone believes what the police told him".
It might seem a minor difference but it is an important one.
"... we talk about pieces of a puzzle as though they are a solution to the puzzle."
I call this the "Solar Cell Syndrome".
I have read, on a very frequent and regular basis for more than 30 years now (how much more I will not say), "Scientists Have Found A Way To Increase The Efficiency Of Photovoltaic Cells By 50 Percent!"
Of course if all of these hundreds of reports were literally true, and even if only a small fraction of those improvements worked together, we would today have photovoltaic cells that were 500% efficient or better. (Obviously not achievable with this level of technology and likely not at all.) Instead, their actual efficiency has c-r-a-w-l-e-d v-e-r-y- s-l-o-w-l-y upward. We might soon have some commercially that break 30%.
Over the years, other fields of science and engineering have been guilty (maybe victim?) of this. It makes me rather sad. It may drive research grants, but dishonesty is what it is, and false promises are what they are.
Or maybe he meant that the source data was improperly selected or filtered. That may be a justifiable statement, too, but the results are the same: subjective experience suggests a genuine phenomenon, and the preliminary data may call for further study.
I think what the poster was trying to say, is that the results are probably not statistically significant.
Intriguing, yes. And (in my own past experience) probably somewhat accurate. Which means, as you stated elsewhere, that it may be fodder for further study.
But posting these kinds of preliminary results in a forum like Slashdot usually does little but foment rabid responses. I am actually surprised at the relative civility of most of what I have read so far.
"I think the "alarmism" comes in when the data sharing is unintentional."
Ahah. But how much of the data sharing is "unintentional"? Is your data exposed to a glorified clerk at the company, who wants to do admin work on it? Maybe a web developer? Maybe a manager who wants to mainly look at monthly stats but has access to all of it? Do any of your ex-girlfriends work there?
The BIG data and privacy problems are usually behind the scenes. If people would just wrap their heads around that, we would be having much healthier discussions about this subject.
I say this from the perspective of a web developer who has access to the data of many thousands of people I don't know, from various websites I have built and maintained. The only thing I do not know is their passwords, because as an ethical person I make sure that those are stored in a properly encrypted form.
But guess what? If I were not ethical, I could write a program to save each encrypted password, replace it with something else I knew, access their account, do whatever I wanted, then restore everything. Even the timestamps, and server logs. Hell, it would be easy. I mean it would take a while to code it all, but there's nothing even remotely difficult about it.
And I must have this ability, in order to build and maintain the app you so much enjoy using. So don't get to thinking there's an easy way around it. There is not.
"If I am dry-humping a billy goat in front of an Italian restaurant bay window, the people taking pictures of me and posting them on reddit is an INVASION OF PRIVACY!!!!!!!!"
No, it's an amusing viral video.
Seriously, do you not get the whole privacy thing? There are places in which (and things about) we have a "reasonable expectation of privacy". The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that without this, the other rights we rely on, spelled out in the Bill of Rights, could not exist.
You can pooh-pooh privacy all you want, but that only reflects your ignorance of the topic.
It's still a security hole. Who has access to this data? Nike employees you don't know? Maybe one of them is an ex-girlfriend? Or maybe they do like a couple of big banks did: back things up to some external drive, then somehow "lose" them on the way to storage.
Right. Give me a break. If you put it "in the cloud", watch your ass. Because you can be pretty sure somebody else is.
"Yes, the guy was clearly an idiot. Much smarter: leave your Nike fuelband and your iPhone on your nightside table when you sneak out. Then, when accused of cheating, you can pull down the data from the cloud, and *prove* you were at home sleeping."
Except that your pulse rate will be 0, and your body temperature will be 70F.
"Clearly, the guy who was wearing the band forgot to take it off when he was into his laborous other activities."
No, clearly you don't understand how they work. If he took it off or turned it off, it would still record all the activities before and after. He would have to disable it maybe hours before he conducted his "clandestine" activities, and wait for further hours before he enabled it again... and then someone else would still wonder about the gap time.
But this is still basically the same "cloud" problem I've been talking about for a long time. If you put your information out there, somebody is likely to get it. And not always legally.
If I were a business owner, there is no way in hell I'd let my books be done "online", for example, even if it's cheaper and easier. Just forget it. If things get better, maybe. Probably a long time from now.
"Wasn't it enough to pretend that you're ball-less? Why also dispute the existence of other balls?"
When an individual displays their absence (figuratively speaking) shoved in my face, why should I dispute their absence??? This seems, on its face, to be a rather bizarre question.
In regard to implications of other balls, or lack thereof, they can simply present evidence or fuck off. Again, why should there be any dispute about this?
Posting personal accusations using "anonymous coward" when you are in fact a long-time Slashdot user, is rather a blatant public demonstration of the aforementioned lack. Argue all you want. You just reinforce your (testicle-free) argument. If you want to come up with FACTS, that might be a different story.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want the 15c, get the emulator which works exactly the same and uses the actual code from the HP 15c ROM.
Unless you HAVE to have it in your pocket, doing a little searching and getting it free is much better than laying out $$$.
Dude. If you don't need to have it in your pocket, you can get the 15c in software (using an emulator, but it's official HP ROM) for free. Looks and feels exactly the same, you just need to use your keyboard or mouse for input.
You can also get the 16c (I have them both). And for $9, you can get the HP 54g from the Apple app store, again with official HP ROM.
By the way, I also have the HP 15c and 16c in software, both also excellent for the tasks for which they are designed. These are open source emulations, not from the Apple app store, but again they use the actual HP ROMs.
You might have to do a bit of hunting to find those.
Despite HP's statement long ago that they were getting out of the calculator business, they did release a color graphing calculator 4 or 5 years back, give or take. I don't remember the model number. I saw the actual product in Office Depot.
Sales were a flop. People considered the color feature to be an unnecessary toy and unjustified expense.
But if you are running OS X, you can get a virtual HP 48 or 54g, complete with actual, official (courtesy of HP) firmware, running in an emulator, for only $9. (Not a typo... that's less than 10.) At the OS X app store. Looks and works exactly like a 54g. (Or 48, if you like that one better.) It's called "Emu48" but it does both 48 and the 54g.
I don't think it's on iOS, which would be cool, but I think it would probably strain the device's resources.
Since I have need of a good programmable, higher-math-capable calculator at times, but don't need (or want) to carry one in my pocket, this was ideal for me. It's an incredible value.
Ah... now, THAT is failing with panache.
Pardon again. I'm not being sarcastic, just incredulous. But I made an error. "whether someone 'believes the police told him'" should be "whether someone believes what the police told him".
It might seem a minor difference but it is an important one.
"Editorial judgement determines that a first-hand witness is happy to state on the record what he believes the police told him: story broadcast."
What?
Pardon me, but it appears here that you are saying that whether to show a story is dependent on whether someone "believes the police told him"?
Am I insane, or is that what parent wrote?
Because here, that would be a laughable standard. I mean, nobody would even consider it.
"... we talk about pieces of a puzzle as though they are a solution to the puzzle."
I call this the "Solar Cell Syndrome".
I have read, on a very frequent and regular basis for more than 30 years now (how much more I will not say), "Scientists Have Found A Way To Increase The Efficiency Of Photovoltaic Cells By 50 Percent!"
Of course if all of these hundreds of reports were literally true, and even if only a small fraction of those improvements worked together, we would today have photovoltaic cells that were 500% efficient or better. (Obviously not achievable with this level of technology and likely not at all.) Instead, their actual efficiency has c-r-a-w-l-e-d v-e-r-y- s-l-o-w-l-y upward. We might soon have some commercially that break 30%.
Over the years, other fields of science and engineering have been guilty (maybe victim?) of this. It makes me rather sad. It may drive research grants, but dishonesty is what it is, and false promises are what they are.
Or maybe he meant that the source data was improperly selected or filtered. That may be a justifiable statement, too, but the results are the same: subjective experience suggests a genuine phenomenon, and the preliminary data may call for further study.
"You're confusing results with method."
I think what the poster was trying to say, is that the results are probably not statistically significant.
Intriguing, yes. And (in my own past experience) probably somewhat accurate. Which means, as you stated elsewhere, that it may be fodder for further study.
But posting these kinds of preliminary results in a forum like Slashdot usually does little but foment rabid responses. I am actually surprised at the relative civility of most of what I have read so far.
Please mod this post up. And show it in bold print.
You and I have disagreed at times, but this is the kind of thing "science-oriented" minds should see.
"So expect the cover problem to be resolved at least sometime next year"
And what about their stock. Eh?
"I can definitively see how it could happen, if the cover is not perfectly glued/molded."
Then it should be screwed. And if not, maybe it's screwed. I guess we'll have to see.
"If you don't like it!"
Steve would not like that.
(/. would not let me actually quote you... it gave me a "lameness filter" error. Personally, I would not have been so harsh.)
"Good point. Tell you what, how about you buy one and let us know how that works out for you?"
Why do you think I would have any motivation to report to somebody who associates appreciation for a superior product with cognitive dissonance?
Cognitive dissonance, maybe?
"... they have no incentive to let you know what is showing on other channels."
There is a ridiculously simple -- and INEXPENSIVE -- solution to this problem:
[1] Each broadcast or cable channel publishes its schedule and program info to a central database at the FCC.
[2] The FCC broadcasts -- free -- all this information, on a specified band and standardized format.
[3] Problem disappears.
"I think the "alarmism" comes in when the data sharing is unintentional."
Ahah. But how much of the data sharing is "unintentional"? Is your data exposed to a glorified clerk at the company, who wants to do admin work on it? Maybe a web developer? Maybe a manager who wants to mainly look at monthly stats but has access to all of it? Do any of your ex-girlfriends work there?
The BIG data and privacy problems are usually behind the scenes. If people would just wrap their heads around that, we would be having much healthier discussions about this subject.
I say this from the perspective of a web developer who has access to the data of many thousands of people I don't know, from various websites I have built and maintained. The only thing I do not know is their passwords, because as an ethical person I make sure that those are stored in a properly encrypted form.
But guess what? If I were not ethical, I could write a program to save each encrypted password, replace it with something else I knew, access their account, do whatever I wanted, then restore everything. Even the timestamps, and server logs. Hell, it would be easy. I mean it would take a while to code it all, but there's nothing even remotely difficult about it.
And I must have this ability, in order to build and maintain the app you so much enjoy using. So don't get to thinking there's an easy way around it. There is not.
"If I am dry-humping a billy goat in front of an Italian restaurant bay window, the people taking pictures of me and posting them on reddit is an INVASION OF PRIVACY!!!!!!!!"
No, it's an amusing viral video.
Seriously, do you not get the whole privacy thing? There are places in which (and things about) we have a "reasonable expectation of privacy". The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that without this, the other rights we rely on, spelled out in the Bill of Rights, could not exist.
You can pooh-pooh privacy all you want, but that only reflects your ignorance of the topic.
You have sidestepped the question. Why do you need any of this data to be "in the cloud"???
Why all the insistence by so many companies that your data be stored "in the cloud" when for most people, there is no good reason for it?
But if you STILL think that's what you need, and have an iOS device, take a look at the Jawbone UP.
It's still a security hole. Who has access to this data? Nike employees you don't know? Maybe one of them is an ex-girlfriend? Or maybe they do like a couple of big banks did: back things up to some external drive, then somehow "lose" them on the way to storage.
Right. Give me a break. If you put it "in the cloud", watch your ass. Because you can be pretty sure somebody else is.
"Yes, the guy was clearly an idiot. Much smarter: leave your Nike fuelband and your iPhone on your nightside table when you sneak out. Then, when accused of cheating, you can pull down the data from the cloud, and *prove* you were at home sleeping."
Except that your pulse rate will be 0, and your body temperature will be 70F.
Yeah. That's the ticket.
"So as a privacy thing, well the only reason it would get you in trouble would be wearing it during sex so you could get the fuel points."
Seriously, if you think that is "the only reason" (way) it can get you in trouble, you have a major lack of imagination.
"Clearly, the guy who was wearing the band forgot to take it off when he was into his laborous other activities."
No, clearly you don't understand how they work. If he took it off or turned it off, it would still record all the activities before and after. He would have to disable it maybe hours before he conducted his "clandestine" activities, and wait for further hours before he enabled it again... and then someone else would still wonder about the gap time.
But this is still basically the same "cloud" problem I've been talking about for a long time. If you put your information out there, somebody is likely to get it. And not always legally.
If I were a business owner, there is no way in hell I'd let my books be done "online", for example, even if it's cheaper and easier. Just forget it. If things get better, maybe. Probably a long time from now.
Oh... and your IP is being recorded. They can actually be compared. Imagine that.
"Wasn't it enough to pretend that you're ball-less? Why also dispute the existence of other balls?"
When an individual displays their absence (figuratively speaking) shoved in my face, why should I dispute their absence??? This seems, on its face, to be a rather bizarre question.
In regard to implications of other balls, or lack thereof, they can simply present evidence or fuck off. Again, why should there be any dispute about this?
Posting personal accusations using "anonymous coward" when you are in fact a long-time Slashdot user, is rather a blatant public demonstration of the aforementioned lack. Argue all you want. You just reinforce your (testicle-free) argument. If you want to come up with FACTS, that might be a different story.