I have had a few past teachers ask me to come in and talk to their classes about computer science/programming. The key to it is to show them the flashier sides of programming. Don't get into information theory, inheritance, memory usage, blah blah blah. Show them some javascript that makes all the images on a web page fly around. Show them a game you wrote. For the older kids you can usually bust out a TI-86 and show them that with a little code you don't really have to think about the math(let them figure out that to code it they will have to learn the math anyway).
For younger kids I recommend the Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich algorithm. Bring in a loaf of bread, a jar of peanut butter, a jar of jelly, and a knife. Set them out on a desk and tell the class that you are going to be a computer and they are going to program you. They need to program you to make a PB&J. Tell them that as a computer you can only do what you are told, you don't know ANYTHING about making sandwiches. They will generally start out with "Open the bread", to which you reply, "What/Where is this bread you speak of?" You can get as specific or as general as you like, generally you can leave out things like how to undo the twist-tie on the bag, but when they tell you to spread the peanut butter you can really mash it in there and tear up the bread. It takes 15-30 minutes depending on the class to get an edible sandwich, but the kids love it.
Who said they were using glass? I've got two boxes of fiber sitting here, one glass and one plastic. Haven't touched the glass stuff in a few years, the bendability of the plastic just makes it a better choice. It is also about half the weight of the glass stuff.
I would assume if this is meant for emergency or wartime use that it would be using the more forgiving, lighter, and more rugged plastic.
At the very least it makes my insurance go up. If we continue down the path of socialized medicine, then I am forced to pay for their fat related illnesses.
Those are pretty direct ways their being obese harms me. That's without going into the environmental or social impacts of it, which are a bit more indirect but still noticeable.
The dynamic type is used by LINQ and a few other lovelies of.NET because there is no good way of figuring out what the type actually is until after the query is done.
At the very least I doubt your ISP would be very happy about it. At worst you are responsible for any traffic that goes in and out of your system. Since you won't be able to prove your machine was acting as a botnet operative, but you instead let unknown people into your system, you will be liable for anything they download/do. So hacking, child porn, bestiality, terrorist threats, etc will all be on you.
While it is a noble burden to bear at first glance, the idea of letting people I don't know onto any of my networks(even if it is secluded from my own machines) does not sit well with me.
You probably don't have any worries from the Chinese government directly, but I also don't know what penalties there are for helping someone in another country commit a crime that isn't illegal where you are.
She has the wrong mindset for a judge at any level. Her job is not to force her views and values down the public's throat, but to interpret the law as closely as the writers had in mind while trying to close the huge loopholes.
Any judge who speaks out in a professional manner about any activity's moral/ethical/philosophical components is not fit to rule. Those parts are reserved for the people to decide upon.
Users do have to agree to let an application use location data, when you open the app it asks if it is allowed to use the data.
There are other ways of determining where a user is and how long they were looking at an ad.
The idea behind iAd as far as I can tell is limit not only what advertisers can collect, but also what they can do with that data. The trade off is that Apple will hold all the data, taking a cut of the profits of course, but will have very detailed info on almost every iPhone user even if they only make that data available in specific ways to advertisers.
As a consumer it both protects you and makes sure you are still a viable target to ads. It is a give and take.
At least that is what I can see from the iAd sections of the new Developer Agreement.
I own my satellite boxes and dish, but I still only get the programming that my provider approves.
I own my iPhone, but I still only get the applications/ads Apple approves.
The third party network line is thin at best. Apple has a partnership with ATT to provide the iPhone, yet they do not prevent other phones from working on ATT's towers. So while two giants are working together, they aren't stopping others from entering the market or competing.
This partnership is also irrelevant to the iAd. Apple is the one telling developers who can do what in code running inside iOS, it wouldn't matter if the iPhone were unlocked and worked on every network.
If what you are saying mattered, Apple would already be in trouble for being an ATT exclusive.
You mean how they control who gets to license the blu-ray spec? Or how they controlled Betamax and kept it away from porn?
The notion that company y has a right to company x's capabilities and information is absurd. Google doesn't have to hand over all their ad data on me to Hulu and Apple, even though they collect the same general info for the same purpose. Apple isn't saying you can't advertise, they are saying you don't get things without joining the club.
As for your TV example, you are basing that off the status quo, one that does not fit here. When you buy an iPhone you go into knowing it is a semi-closed platform and that certain actions will be limited. If TVs were the same you'd go into it knowing that Sony only plays Sony branded/approved media and not Disney's or Warner's content. A better example would have been not being able to update the firmware on your TV without permission from Sony.
The main block Apple has put up is that user location can't be given out to advertisers outside of the iAd system, it is probably going to be pushed as a privacy issue.
Not having used iOS 4, I can't really say if this is a good thing or a bad thing overall, but I do like knowing that there are restrictions in place on who gets to handle what info about me.
Personally, I have location awareness turned off so this doesn't really apply much to me, but the idea is the same.
This isn't a monopoly move either, Apple isn't forcing anything on anyone outside their own platform to do anything. Apple is doing the same thing cable and satellite providers have been doing all along. . . picking and choosing who gets to advertise where and how.
I would wager that it has to do with the way that it gets compiled, if they aren't using Apple's compiler and profiler they may not be taking advantage of the APIs needed to do all that super neato app backgrounding and such.
You call the timing dubious, I say they are pre-emptively stopping thousands of app rejections on a legit rule.
You are bashing Apple for making a system you aren't forced to buy and complaining that you can't 'hack' it in your language of choice. Apple doesn't care about JailBreaking anymore than the bare minimum for legal reasons, if you want to run any old app you can, no Apple approval required.
Fact of the matter is, Apple is a company that makes more money in an hour than you do in 10 years, they aren't stupid people.
Yes, it has some stats that are much higher than the iPads, but it is aimed at solving completely different users.
Look at the six panel layout of the homescreen, why waste the screen with six tiny apps when you can do so much more full screen? Why focus on a Dashboard knock off that you can carry around when people have shown that isn't what they really want in a mobile computing device. Look at what apps get used on smartphones the most often, it isn't the little one off stocks/weather/recording features, they are games and content viewing apps.
TL:DR; It isn't the size of the boat, it's how you sail the ocean.
Most of them would be running an application done in C/C++ or some other low level language with threading. The whole advantage of super computers isn't that they have an absurd ghz rating, but an insane amount of cores. This could be useful for testing how a network of desktop computers would work, which it sounds like from the summary they are doing.
TL:DR; Normal desktop software doesn't run faster on a super computer than on your 4 year old laptop.
I don't think Apple would make Bing the default search engine for any of its products. At the very most Apple would allow users to change their search engine. Think about it, this move would gain Apple nothing. Mobile phone searches don't happen enough for Google to worry about the lost ad revenue and Safari's market share is still pretty low on the desktop, so it wouldn't be a huge hit there either.
The only thing this would do is make users angry, Apple won't switch to Bing.
Apple doesn't have to provide a way for you to put apps onto any of their products. They have a product with some restrictions to help protect their image/brand. They have never said that they would allow any application written to be put in the app store. They also don't have to worry about antitrust because there are other devices that you can buy with its own set of restrictions and apps. I would go as far as to say that Apple is being pretty kind about people circumventing their software restrictions, jailbreaking is against the TOS you sign when you buy the phone and they haven't bothered any Hackintosh builders unless they were selling them.
Apple isn't being deceptive, stop acting like this is the biggest human rights violation since slavery.
Because if they can't review it how can they give you targeted ads?
I doubt that they have people sitting there reading through your TPS reports and geek poetry. I'm betting that they have a list of words they find 'suspect' or that they are using something to look for plagiarism. Still, it would certainly make me think twice about using a service if I know the solution to this is a person verifying my content as appropriate.
Slashdot Mirror
You realize this was actually filmed in space. . .
Most expensive music video ever.
I have had a few past teachers ask me to come in and talk to their classes about computer science/programming. The key to it is to show them the flashier sides of programming. Don't get into information theory, inheritance, memory usage, blah blah blah. Show them some javascript that makes all the images on a web page fly around. Show them a game you wrote. For the older kids you can usually bust out a TI-86 and show them that with a little code you don't really have to think about the math(let them figure out that to code it they will have to learn the math anyway).
For younger kids I recommend the Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich algorithm. Bring in a loaf of bread, a jar of peanut butter, a jar of jelly, and a knife. Set them out on a desk and tell the class that you are going to be a computer and they are going to program you. They need to program you to make a PB&J. Tell them that as a computer you can only do what you are told, you don't know ANYTHING about making sandwiches. They will generally start out with "Open the bread", to which you reply, "What/Where is this bread you speak of?" You can get as specific or as general as you like, generally you can leave out things like how to undo the twist-tie on the bag, but when they tell you to spread the peanut butter you can really mash it in there and tear up the bread. It takes 15-30 minutes depending on the class to get an edible sandwich, but the kids love it.
Squishy eh? How does it compress?
Who said they were using glass? I've got two boxes of fiber sitting here, one glass and one plastic. Haven't touched the glass stuff in a few years, the bendability of the plastic just makes it a better choice. It is also about half the weight of the glass stuff. I would assume if this is meant for emergency or wartime use that it would be using the more forgiving, lighter, and more rugged plastic.
Copper weighs more than a fiber optic cable.
At the very least it makes my insurance go up. If we continue down the path of socialized medicine, then I am forced to pay for their fat related illnesses.
Those are pretty direct ways their being obese harms me. That's without going into the environmental or social impacts of it, which are a bit more indirect but still noticeable.
The dynamic type is used by LINQ and a few other lovelies of .NET because there is no good way of figuring out what the type actually is until after the query is done.
At the very least I doubt your ISP would be very happy about it. At worst you are responsible for any traffic that goes in and out of your system. Since you won't be able to prove your machine was acting as a botnet operative, but you instead let unknown people into your system, you will be liable for anything they download/do. So hacking, child porn, bestiality, terrorist threats, etc will all be on you.
While it is a noble burden to bear at first glance, the idea of letting people I don't know onto any of my networks(even if it is secluded from my own machines) does not sit well with me.
You probably don't have any worries from the Chinese government directly, but I also don't know what penalties there are for helping someone in another country commit a crime that isn't illegal where you are.
She has the wrong mindset for a judge at any level. Her job is not to force her views and values down the public's throat, but to interpret the law as closely as the writers had in mind while trying to close the huge loopholes.
Any judge who speaks out in a professional manner about any activity's moral/ethical/philosophical components is not fit to rule. Those parts are reserved for the people to decide upon.
Users do have to agree to let an application use location data, when you open the app it asks if it is allowed to use the data.
There are other ways of determining where a user is and how long they were looking at an ad.
The idea behind iAd as far as I can tell is limit not only what advertisers can collect, but also what they can do with that data. The trade off is that Apple will hold all the data, taking a cut of the profits of course, but will have very detailed info on almost every iPhone user even if they only make that data available in specific ways to advertisers.
As a consumer it both protects you and makes sure you are still a viable target to ads. It is a give and take.
At least that is what I can see from the iAd sections of the new Developer Agreement.
I own my satellite boxes and dish, but I still only get the programming that my provider approves.
I own my iPhone, but I still only get the applications/ads Apple approves.
The third party network line is thin at best. Apple has a partnership with ATT to provide the iPhone, yet they do not prevent other phones from working on ATT's towers. So while two giants are working together, they aren't stopping others from entering the market or competing.
This partnership is also irrelevant to the iAd. Apple is the one telling developers who can do what in code running inside iOS, it wouldn't matter if the iPhone were unlocked and worked on every network.
If what you are saying mattered, Apple would already be in trouble for being an ATT exclusive.
You mean how they control who gets to license the blu-ray spec? Or how they controlled Betamax and kept it away from porn?
The notion that company y has a right to company x's capabilities and information is absurd. Google doesn't have to hand over all their ad data on me to Hulu and Apple, even though they collect the same general info for the same purpose. Apple isn't saying you can't advertise, they are saying you don't get things without joining the club.
As for your TV example, you are basing that off the status quo, one that does not fit here. When you buy an iPhone you go into knowing it is a semi-closed platform and that certain actions will be limited. If TVs were the same you'd go into it knowing that Sony only plays Sony branded/approved media and not Disney's or Warner's content. A better example would have been not being able to update the firmware on your TV without permission from Sony.
The main block Apple has put up is that user location can't be given out to advertisers outside of the iAd system, it is probably going to be pushed as a privacy issue.
Not having used iOS 4, I can't really say if this is a good thing or a bad thing overall, but I do like knowing that there are restrictions in place on who gets to handle what info about me.
Personally, I have location awareness turned off so this doesn't really apply much to me, but the idea is the same.
This isn't a monopoly move either, Apple isn't forcing anything on anyone outside their own platform to do anything. Apple is doing the same thing cable and satellite providers have been doing all along. . . picking and choosing who gets to advertise where and how.
Good thinking. *Glues webcam to his shotgun* See? Now I have an 'electronic sighting system', it just happens to also record things.
So basically rely on their lawyers being caught with their pants down on your technical expertise and then actually prove they are at fault?
I would wager that it has to do with the way that it gets compiled, if they aren't using Apple's compiler and profiler they may not be taking advantage of the APIs needed to do all that super neato app backgrounding and such.
You call the timing dubious, I say they are pre-emptively stopping thousands of app rejections on a legit rule.
You are bashing Apple for making a system you aren't forced to buy and complaining that you can't 'hack' it in your language of choice. Apple doesn't care about JailBreaking anymore than the bare minimum for legal reasons, if you want to run any old app you can, no Apple approval required.
Fact of the matter is, Apple is a company that makes more money in an hour than you do in 10 years, they aren't stupid people.
I just want another Mario Teaches Typing.
Yes, it has some stats that are much higher than the iPads, but it is aimed at solving completely different users.
Look at the six panel layout of the homescreen, why waste the screen with six tiny apps when you can do so much more full screen? Why focus on a Dashboard knock off that you can carry around when people have shown that isn't what they really want in a mobile computing device. Look at what apps get used on smartphones the most often, it isn't the little one off stocks/weather/recording features, they are games and content viewing apps.
TL:DR; It isn't the size of the boat, it's how you sail the ocean.
Most of them would be running an application done in C/C++ or some other low level language with threading. The whole advantage of super computers isn't that they have an absurd ghz rating, but an insane amount of cores. This could be useful for testing how a network of desktop computers would work, which it sounds like from the summary they are doing.
TL:DR; Normal desktop software doesn't run faster on a super computer than on your 4 year old laptop.
The grey goo wars have begun!
You can switch from Google to Yahoo on the iPhone, on desktop Safari you have to dive into the command line.
I don't think Apple would make Bing the default search engine for any of its products. At the very most Apple would allow users to change their search engine. Think about it, this move would gain Apple nothing. Mobile phone searches don't happen enough for Google to worry about the lost ad revenue and Safari's market share is still pretty low on the desktop, so it wouldn't be a huge hit there either.
The only thing this would do is make users angry, Apple won't switch to Bing.
Apple doesn't have to provide a way for you to put apps onto any of their products. They have a product with some restrictions to help protect their image/brand. They have never said that they would allow any application written to be put in the app store. They also don't have to worry about antitrust because there are other devices that you can buy with its own set of restrictions and apps. I would go as far as to say that Apple is being pretty kind about people circumventing their software restrictions, jailbreaking is against the TOS you sign when you buy the phone and they haven't bothered any Hackintosh builders unless they were selling them.
Apple isn't being deceptive, stop acting like this is the biggest human rights violation since slavery.
Because if they can't review it how can they give you targeted ads? I doubt that they have people sitting there reading through your TPS reports and geek poetry. I'm betting that they have a list of words they find 'suspect' or that they are using something to look for plagiarism. Still, it would certainly make me think twice about using a service if I know the solution to this is a person verifying my content as appropriate.