Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these on your arm?
Seriously, though - this reminds me of research at getting a network running through skin connectivity. Combine that with really small wearable processors, and you get to transmit files to your friends by shaking hands with them. The original implementation I remember was that you'd have a shoe that traded business cards with other people's shoes, by shaking hands. Crazy.
For 99% of the people out there, a distributed OS would be pointless. Quake 3 won't play faster, your documents won't print faster, it won't boot faster, and your screen-saver won't look prettier.
I happen to be in the other 1%. If I could write multi-threaded applications that automatically distributed across a network of computers, I'd be very happy. Zero-effort solutions like this are the way of the future. Now, it doesn't necessarily have to be the OS that has all of these smarts - the compiler could take a big portion of that.
Anyway - good idea for us people who manage 20 machines and batch-process hours of work on them. But, for your average John Q. Citizen, totally useless.
I don't know what it would be, but I think science should call something The Reindeer Effect. That way, maybe someday, someone would get to say, "Gentlemen, what I think we have here is a terrifiying example of The Reindeer Effect." -Deep Thoughts, By Jack Handy (paraphrased)
My objection is that they can make money off of my generated code, B - can modify it, can fix it, can redistribute it, and never share any of their fixes with me - and they don't have to distribute their final code.
Call my code YACC - and everyone's happy that the final output code is without liscence restrictions (as long as it doesn't include any YACC libraries.)
But, if instead my program were to output the source code to Slash... I make a GPL program that outputs a GPL program - who's to complain? But, what if someone legally modifies my GPL program to output a non-GPL'd Slash - and procedes to modify it, and do wiked-evil things with it. I grant that this is a contrived example.
A more real-world example is the kind of automatic code generation that goes on in the Mesa libraries. Or, for instance, if my code is "unrolling the loop" for a complicated chunk of code, in order to produce highly optimized output.
Essentially, I have my infectious-GPL code. You can't use it, unless you're GPL, too. But, my infectious-GPL code's only usefulness is in producing output source code, tailored to your specific needs. My original intention was to output GPL code! To restrict the use of the output of my program - after all - it's SOURCE CODE THAT I PRODUCED. Granted, I produced it indirectly - and therein lies the problem.
Imagine this : I distribute the source code to my program, A. That program, when run, produces a file which contains the source code to a program B. Now, I put A under the GPL, so people can modify it. And I put stuff in the source code that when run, inserts text in the output that puts B in the GPL, as well. What's to stop someone from legally change the source code to A, such that when it outputs B, it says that B is in the Public Domain? They've just taken my code, and changed its legal intent, in a way that I can't possibly imagine how you'd prevent.
You might shake your head and think that I'm contriving a situation - but I actually have source code like this, and it is a genuine concern of mine, and I imagine other people.
Seems like you can hit Next twice-and-hold to skip forward through songs, but Preview thrice-and-hold to skip backward through songs... But Thanks for the info!
My MPTrip seems to just ignore Non-MP3 files. I'm not 100% positive, because the CD-R I have with non-MP3's also has all of the MP3's in one directory, which is a no-no. So, it can play 77 of the 120 songs just fine. I'm almost positive the problem has nothing to do with the M3U's and EXE's (WinAmp and AudioCatalyst) that I've got on it - it's just the directory-length problem. So, as long as you put each album in a seperate directory (no more than 20? files), you should be okay.
I ordered my MPTrip over a month ago, called back recently and was told that it had shipped. Called back again, and was told it hadn't shipped, and they had in fact lost my order. After complaining loudly, they agreed to ship me another, with no handling charge. So, I finally got it.
The first thing I noticed when I opened it was the EUROPEAN AC ADAPTER. Thanks, you jerks. I'm pretty sure that I'm a freak accident on their part, but still - what a kick in the pants?
I've played several MP3-filled CD-R's in it, haven't tried any CD's or CD-RW's, yet. The first I tried, I had made the stupid decision to fill the CD with MP3's, all in one directory (all from the same band - why not?) It can only play the first 77 songs in the directory, of about 120. So, don't do that.
Then I discovered that there's a Next button, but no Previous button. I can't go BACK one song. (I think I might be able to, by hitting Preview twice in a row.) The buttons are kind of crappy, but they work just fine. The Play / Pause button is the smallest one on the thing. The rubber feet on mine are of different heights, so it doesn't sit level. The ear-buds are kind of sucky, but they're not that bad. So what? Buy another pair, and you're good to go.
But, it does play MP3's from a CD-R, and it sounds good. AND it DOES NOT SKIP. I've done the "shake and bake" on it, while listening, and no audio degradation. I also dropped it on the floor, hard enough for it to open the case and drop the CD-R on the floor, but it still runs just fine.
All told - imagine a $40 CD player. Yeah - seriously - that bad (except it sounds good - it's just chintzy material, bad design, etc). Then, make it play MP3s off of CD-R's (and supposedly CD-RW's). And that makes all the difference! =) Mine is definitely worth the $115 I put in it. I can run with it, and have a LARGE selection of random music to listen to. And I can have a nice on-the-plane distraction (my ENTIRE music collection in a 24-CD-R case). So, just ignore the crappy quality, and enjoy the hours of good-sounding tunes, and you'll be fine.
When some respectable company finally comes out with a good-quality model, I'll undoubtedly buy it, even at twice the price. I want a Previous button pretty badly. And an LCD that actually shows the ID3 tag would be REALLY REALLY nice. (Also being able to use a Playlist would be very nice.)
Final review : 3 out of 5 stars. Does what it's advertised to do - PLAYS MP3 CD-R's, and seems like it's not going to break or otherwise fail. It just doesn't have ANY bells or whistles that you'd expect. NONE, okay? It just PLAYS, it doesn't do anything else!!! Oh yeah - I've had it for 28 hours, and it's already got MASSIVE scratches on it's crappy gold surface from carrying it in a backpack with CD-R's in their cases. =(
If you leave the keys in your car, it's your fault if it gets stolen. I'd be pissed if OUR insurance company helped you buy a new one, because it costs ME money to correct YOUR mistake.
People will only commit the crimes it's POSSIBLE for them to commit.
If everyone in the world used MS Outlook, and everyone automatically ran attachments - guess what? - everyone in the world would have lost all of their media files (at the very least), when ILOVEYOU came on the scene.
Predators STRENGTHEN prey, as just about ANY scientist who knows anything about evolution can tell you.
How about an agent system that negotiates with coders about what to develop for open source projects. Kind of an INTELLIGENT Bugzilla, that instead of being passive, is an ACTIVE system. "Active Feature Enhancement," or some such.
An agent for each program, and for each developer. A classification system that learns about the kinds of bugs and updates there are, and learns about the abilities of the developers, and bridges the gap between them. That'd be awesome.
It not only searches out developers to fix (or work on) code, it searches out programs that developers could make a big contribution to.
Also, possibly, an agent for each bug reporter... And for each "reviewer" - people who verify bug fixes / enhancements.
The system would learn, over time, for instance, that I like to complain about weird interfaces and constantly demand good help systems. It would then know to use me as a "reviewer" of fixes to those kinds of problems. "Dear VikingCoder, the AFE system has received a fix to a help system problem in emacs, would you be willing to review and grade the fix?"
Also, it learns that I'm a very apt OpenGL coder, and learns that if it asks me to write some code, other people are likely to grade my code highly.
HUH? Not bad, eh? This would be a cool, cool, cool system.
You'd probably be able to pawn it off on SourceForge, for instance...
Comments Containing A Copy of the Specification: "by smartin on Tuesday, May 02, @02:20PM EST (#86)"
What? Read the smartin comment for yourself:
What happens to the people that implement it (ie. the Samba guys) even if they obtain the information without intentionally breaking the license. Are they exposing themselves to expensive litigation? Are they endangering the project?
Where does that "Contain A Copy of the Specification"?
Metallica owns the Copyright to their music. On SlashDot, we delight in pointing out people who've violated the terms of the GPL - unintentionally (or intentionally) released binaries without releasing the source to modified programs. That's our license. It's the Truth, the Law, the Way. If everyone followed it, the world would be a better place. And, guess what - it's a legal document. We're using the law to enforce our rights and our beliefs.
Well, guess what - so is Metallica.
I can accept that you disagree with their beliefs, or that you think it's a stupid move. But they are simply attempting to defend their rights. We'd applaud them if they were an open-source software group, and the offenders were corporate big-wigs.
As to an "invasion of privacy?" BULLSH*T. As a user of Napster, you understand that your user name will be listed, when people find a song that you're sharing. There's no Anonymous Coward in Napster. However, it's just a USERNAME, okay? They simply had a creative use of the system, to defend their rights. I agree that it's a silly way to do it, but I don't think they acted illegally, as JK seems to imply.
Boycott? Fine - you can boycott whatever you want to. Don't be hypocritical about it, though, kids. I imagine many SlashDot readers write commercial software for a living. Imagine that someone STEALS what you've worked hard to produce. How does that make you feel? You've lost your livlihood because some jerk, acting in the name of Freedom violated your rights?! Now, imagine the idiot left a calling card - a way that you could identify them. You wouldn't pursue them? I don't care if it is a 12-year old. Ignorance of the law is not protection from it. There's no "right" that Metallica is infringing, here, folks.
As a content provider, they have every right to expect to receive compensation for what they produce.
If I made BlueHat, a DIRECT RIP-OFF of RedHat, including their user manuals, and I didn't even bother to add anything new to it, you think I'd be left alone? Hell no - I'd be lambasted.
I'm one of the original guys who posted the Ask Slashdot question.
I never said I wanted "the best" - I know how much prices vary, when it comes to this stuff. (4 to 5 orders of magnitude.) Pointing out my desire to use a DCR-TRV 103 was, as you pointed out, a very consice way for me to say exactly what level of product I would be happy with - I think for the money ($649), it can't be beat.
You're right - I'm obviously not high-end. However, I will use whatever system I buy, and I did two days of research before I posted my question. I wan't satisfied with the information I found (and I had run dry on my sources), so I played my Nerd Trump Card - I Asked Slashdot. Unfortunately, my strong Intel bias limited me from finding the G4 information that I needed, making me look like an idiot to people like you. If you unintentionally overlook all the Mac DV editing options, the $499 Canopus Raptor with the full Adobe Premiere 5.1 (together) starts to seem pretty good. After looking at the Raptor Requirements, the eMonster 550R looked like more than enough machine (once you upgrade to about 256M of Ram, and toss in a second hard-drive at about 30G.) Granted, I prefer home-brewed solutions, but the couple eMachines we have at work stack up fairly well, for the price we paid for them. It's also a lot easier to describe a home-brew machine by pointing to the closest consumer-level product...
I don't want to shoot the next Star Wars; I was hoping I could make something that looked 1/10th as cool as El Mariachi. (If you don't know about El Mariachi, then it's hard to imagine you know anything about amateur film-making.) I'd like to make something maybe 5-10 minutes long, for my first attempt. Think "Bedhead", but in color. I believe this is a realistic goal, since Robert Rodriguez says he thinks that digital video is the wave of the future - that young film-makers are going to swamp the biz with fairly high-quality films for dirt cheap. I don't think he'd say that unless he'd researched it some, and he's got far better connections and a lot more money than I do.
Anyways, thanks for the unwarranted criticism - gave me something to stew over.
P.S. If most of the $7000 spent on El Mariachi was on buying and developing film, and if I spend $7000 on digital equipment, do you think I'll be able to come close to its quality? (An Arriflex 16S Camera compared to a Sony DCR-TRV 103?)
Hi - I'm one of the two guys who posted the original Ask Slashdot question. I really appreciate all of the responses that this generated. Thanks, all. The Slashdot crowd did not let me down. In particular, I'd like to thank Cannonball and larkost - your posts were informative and well-written.
I'm amazed at how much people raved about the G4, it sounds like the way to go. So, now I'm off to shoot all of my video, doing some rough-cut editing on VHS. After I've tinkered enough, and if I think I have enough material to work with, I think I might just buy myself a G4! (My other Intel friends would just die if they heard me say that.)
Ha! This strikes me as obvious - "Look, we invented a way to muck up a file-system so badly that no other operating system would ever attempt to mount a drive like this, for fear of accidentally destroying it! Lets spend thousands of man-hours writing code to essentially encrypt a drive in such a way that it'll take a really long time for the open-source people to confidently say that they've figured out all of the ins and outs of our convoluted system! It'll make anyone who installs W2K fear ever installing another system!"
I saw this robot on Scientific American Frontiers at least a year ago, so it's not that new.
Also, swinging along parallel ropes of a known distance appart is nowhere near as hard as walking. If it could literally swing between oddly arranged branches, that'd be cool. But it's not. It's another interesting case study in "how animals move", but the lessons you can learn from this do not translate very easily into the world of walking robots.
They're fun, because I could see the power company making robots that walk along power lines, or some crazy thing. Imagine a ski lift that swings up the lines. Lots of weird, fun applications come to mind.
But, this robot is not a "big swing forward" in robot development. It's a very specific, not very useful instance of people with too much time trying to make a robot that does Yet Another Goofy Thing.
I emailed E*Trade, and asked them to donate to saving the chimps (which are apes, not monkeys, by the way). There was just an article today about how Jane Goodall's Gombe research facility is down to a 10 mile by 3 mile long strip of forest. Goodall speaks out against the use of chimps in commercials and movies, and I figure that the least E*Trade can do is to donate some. (They spent $2 Million on the ad, maybe they could drop a few hundred thousand on making the world a better place.) Especially considering that some people seem to think it was a great ad, and E*Trade will probably make a great deal of money off of it. I'd appreciate it if you gave them the same feedback. I know this is a tree-hugging kind of point to be making about a Super Bowl ad, but the chimps are screwed, unless they get some help. Also, isn't environmental preservation a nerd issue, too? It's nice to hack all day in front of a glowing screen, but it's also nice to know there's a world to go outside to, full of interesting animals, if you ever get the urge. *grin*
Anyone who makes the assertion that "people are voting with their dollars" in reference to the Findings of Fact (FOF) - has obviously not read the FOF.
The FOF refers quite specifically to the browser wars, which for the most part were waged between competitors who were both offering free products.
The FOF talk about how a free product was a threat to Microsoft's Operating System as a platform. About how Microsoft used it's unbelievable wealth and power (it's monopoly) to kill Netscape, because it realized that a cross-platform development environment would weaken the strength of Windows as the only choice for the consumer.
Everyone talking loudly about the FOF and whether the government should have gotten involved seems to think that the monopoly case is about the Operating System Wars - Windows, Apple, BeOS, Linux, etc. The FOF, however, only refer to those other OSs to point out that Windows is the current clear winner. Given the OS strength that they have, they used their power to crush a competitor - Netscape.
Reading the portion of the FOF about how Microsoft screwed IBM makes me sad. I don't think IBM is the best company in the world, but if anyone could have defended themself, it would have been IBM. The FOF details how IBM lost hundreds of millions of dollars because Microsoft jerked them around.
Anyway, the Findings of Fact are easy to read, very interesting, very well written, very consice, and very damning for Microsoft.
I believe that this is the Internet's "Declaration of Independance." We will not allow Microsoft to exist as a monopoly, while abusing its power to kill competition.
This brings up an interesting chain of thought in my mind : could a game like EverQuest (a Massively Multiplayer Roleplaying Game) be developed by the OpenSource community, without people trying to take advantage of the fact that they could hack the rules of the game?
Undoubtedly, some people would bend or break the rules of the game, either just for the joy of hacking, or in an attempt to gain skills or items in the game that are beyond their current means.
So, the next question is : is that a bad thing? I suppose that it is, under many circumstances, but I can imagine a game where part of the fun is to see how far you can hack the rules - within certain limits.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, though - this reminds me of research at getting a network running through skin connectivity. Combine that with really small wearable processors, and you get to transmit files to your friends by shaking hands with them. The original implementation I remember was that you'd have a shoe that traded business cards with other people's shoes, by shaking hands. Crazy.
I happen to be in the other 1%. If I could write multi-threaded applications that automatically distributed across a network of computers, I'd be very happy. Zero-effort solutions like this are the way of the future. Now, it doesn't necessarily have to be the OS that has all of these smarts - the compiler could take a big portion of that.
Anyway - good idea for us people who manage 20 machines and batch-process hours of work on them. But, for your average John Q. Citizen, totally useless.
I don't know what it would be, but I think science should call something The Reindeer Effect. That way, maybe someday, someone would get to say, "Gentlemen, what I think we have here is a terrifiying example of The Reindeer Effect." -Deep Thoughts, By Jack Handy (paraphrased)
Call my code YACC - and everyone's happy that the final output code is without liscence restrictions (as long as it doesn't include any YACC libraries.)
But, if instead my program were to output the source code to Slash... I make a GPL program that outputs a GPL program - who's to complain? But, what if someone legally modifies my GPL program to output a non-GPL'd Slash - and procedes to modify it, and do wiked-evil things with it. I grant that this is a contrived example.
A more real-world example is the kind of automatic code generation that goes on in the Mesa libraries. Or, for instance, if my code is "unrolling the loop" for a complicated chunk of code, in order to produce highly optimized output.
Essentially, I have my infectious-GPL code. You can't use it, unless you're GPL, too. But, my infectious-GPL code's only usefulness is in producing output source code, tailored to your specific needs. My original intention was to output GPL code! To restrict the use of the output of my program - after all - it's SOURCE CODE THAT I PRODUCED. Granted, I produced it indirectly - and therein lies the problem.
You might shake your head and think that I'm contriving a situation - but I actually have source code like this, and it is a genuine concern of mine, and I imagine other people.
Seems like you can hit Next twice-and-hold to skip forward through songs, but Preview thrice-and-hold to skip backward through songs... But Thanks for the info!
My MPTrip seems to just ignore Non-MP3 files. I'm not 100% positive, because the CD-R I have with non-MP3's also has all of the MP3's in one directory, which is a no-no. So, it can play 77 of the 120 songs just fine. I'm almost positive the problem has nothing to do with the M3U's and EXE's (WinAmp and AudioCatalyst) that I've got on it - it's just the directory-length problem. So, as long as you put each album in a seperate directory (no more than 20? files), you should be okay.
The first thing I noticed when I opened it was the EUROPEAN AC ADAPTER. Thanks, you jerks. I'm pretty sure that I'm a freak accident on their part, but still - what a kick in the pants?
I've played several MP3-filled CD-R's in it, haven't tried any CD's or CD-RW's, yet. The first I tried, I had made the stupid decision to fill the CD with MP3's, all in one directory (all from the same band - why not?) It can only play the first 77 songs in the directory, of about 120. So, don't do that.
Then I discovered that there's a Next button, but no Previous button. I can't go BACK one song. (I think I might be able to, by hitting Preview twice in a row.) The buttons are kind of crappy, but they work just fine. The Play / Pause button is the smallest one on the thing. The rubber feet on mine are of different heights, so it doesn't sit level. The ear-buds are kind of sucky, but they're not that bad. So what? Buy another pair, and you're good to go.
But, it does play MP3's from a CD-R, and it sounds good. AND it DOES NOT SKIP. I've done the "shake and bake" on it, while listening, and no audio degradation. I also dropped it on the floor, hard enough for it to open the case and drop the CD-R on the floor, but it still runs just fine.
All told - imagine a $40 CD player. Yeah - seriously - that bad (except it sounds good - it's just chintzy material, bad design, etc). Then, make it play MP3s off of CD-R's (and supposedly CD-RW's). And that makes all the difference! =) Mine is definitely worth the $115 I put in it. I can run with it, and have a LARGE selection of random music to listen to. And I can have a nice on-the-plane distraction (my ENTIRE music collection in a 24-CD-R case). So, just ignore the crappy quality, and enjoy the hours of good-sounding tunes, and you'll be fine.
When some respectable company finally comes out with a good-quality model, I'll undoubtedly buy it, even at twice the price. I want a Previous button pretty badly. And an LCD that actually shows the ID3 tag would be REALLY REALLY nice. (Also being able to use a Playlist would be very nice.)
Final review : 3 out of 5 stars. Does what it's advertised to do - PLAYS MP3 CD-R's, and seems like it's not going to break or otherwise fail. It just doesn't have ANY bells or whistles that you'd expect. NONE, okay? It just PLAYS, it doesn't do anything else!!! Oh yeah - I've had it for 28 hours, and it's already got MASSIVE scratches on it's crappy gold surface from carrying it in a backpack with CD-R's in their cases. =(
People will only commit the crimes it's POSSIBLE for them to commit.
If everyone in the world used MS Outlook, and everyone automatically ran attachments - guess what? - everyone in the world would have lost all of their media files (at the very least), when ILOVEYOU came on the scene.
Predators STRENGTHEN prey, as just about ANY scientist who knows anything about evolution can tell you.
So, it's an ink... How about a tattoo made from this stuff? You'd have to charge it somehow, sure - but it seems like it's a possiblity.
An agent for each program, and for each developer. A classification system that learns about the kinds of bugs and updates there are, and learns about the abilities of the developers, and bridges the gap between them. That'd be awesome.
It not only searches out developers to fix (or work on) code, it searches out programs that developers could make a big contribution to.
Also, possibly, an agent for each bug reporter... And for each "reviewer" - people who verify bug fixes / enhancements.
The system would learn, over time, for instance, that I like to complain about weird interfaces and constantly demand good help systems. It would then know to use me as a "reviewer" of fixes to those kinds of problems. "Dear VikingCoder, the AFE system has received a fix to a help system problem in emacs, would you be willing to review and grade the fix?"
Also, it learns that I'm a very apt OpenGL coder, and learns that if it asks me to write some code, other people are likely to grade my code highly.
HUH? Not bad, eh? This would be a cool, cool, cool system.
You'd probably be able to pawn it off on SourceForge, for instance...
Good luck with your plans!
Comments Containing A Copy of the Specification:
"by smartin on Tuesday, May 02, @02:20PM EST (#86)"
What? Read the smartin comment for yourself :
What happens to the people that implement it (ie. the Samba guys) even if they obtain the information without intentionally breaking the license. Are they exposing themselves to expensive litigation? Are they endangering the project?
Where does that "Contain A Copy of the Specification"?
Well, guess what - so is Metallica.
I can accept that you disagree with their beliefs, or that you think it's a stupid move. But they are simply attempting to defend their rights. We'd applaud them if they were an open-source software group, and the offenders were corporate big-wigs.
As to an "invasion of privacy?" BULLSH*T. As a user of Napster, you understand that your user name will be listed, when people find a song that you're sharing. There's no Anonymous Coward in Napster. However, it's just a USERNAME, okay? They simply had a creative use of the system, to defend their rights. I agree that it's a silly way to do it, but I don't think they acted illegally, as JK seems to imply.
Boycott? Fine - you can boycott whatever you want to. Don't be hypocritical about it, though, kids. I imagine many SlashDot readers write commercial software for a living. Imagine that someone STEALS what you've worked hard to produce. How does that make you feel? You've lost your livlihood because some jerk, acting in the name of Freedom violated your rights?! Now, imagine the idiot left a calling card - a way that you could identify them. You wouldn't pursue them? I don't care if it is a 12-year old. Ignorance of the law is not protection from it. There's no "right" that Metallica is infringing, here, folks.
As a content provider, they have every right to expect to receive compensation for what they produce.
If I made BlueHat, a DIRECT RIP-OFF of RedHat, including their user manuals, and I didn't even bother to add anything new to it, you think I'd be left alone? Hell no - I'd be lambasted.
I never said I wanted "the best" - I know how much prices vary, when it comes to this stuff. (4 to 5 orders of magnitude.) Pointing out my desire to use a DCR-TRV 103 was, as you pointed out, a very consice way for me to say exactly what level of product I would be happy with - I think for the money ($649), it can't be beat.
You're right - I'm obviously not high-end. However, I will use whatever system I buy, and I did two days of research before I posted my question. I wan't satisfied with the information I found (and I had run dry on my sources), so I played my Nerd Trump Card - I Asked Slashdot. Unfortunately, my strong Intel bias limited me from finding the G4 information that I needed, making me look like an idiot to people like you. If you unintentionally overlook all the Mac DV editing options, the $499 Canopus Raptor with the full Adobe Premiere 5.1 (together) starts to seem pretty good. After looking at the Raptor Requirements, the eMonster 550R looked like more than enough machine (once you upgrade to about 256M of Ram, and toss in a second hard-drive at about 30G.) Granted, I prefer home-brewed solutions, but the couple eMachines we have at work stack up fairly well, for the price we paid for them. It's also a lot easier to describe a home-brew machine by pointing to the closest consumer-level product...
I don't want to shoot the next Star Wars; I was hoping I could make something that looked 1/10th as cool as El Mariachi. (If you don't know about El Mariachi, then it's hard to imagine you know anything about amateur film-making.) I'd like to make something maybe 5-10 minutes long, for my first attempt. Think "Bedhead", but in color. I believe this is a realistic goal, since Robert Rodriguez says he thinks that digital video is the wave of the future - that young film-makers are going to swamp the biz with fairly high-quality films for dirt cheap. I don't think he'd say that unless he'd researched it some, and he's got far better connections and a lot more money than I do.
Anyways, thanks for the unwarranted criticism - gave me something to stew over.
P.S. If most of the $7000 spent on El Mariachi was on buying and developing film, and if I spend $7000 on digital equipment, do you think I'll be able to come close to its quality? (An Arriflex 16S Camera compared to a Sony DCR-TRV 103?)
I'm amazed at how much people raved about the G4, it sounds like the way to go. So, now I'm off to shoot all of my video, doing some rough-cut editing on VHS. After I've tinkered enough, and if I think I have enough material to work with, I think I might just buy myself a G4! (My other Intel friends would just die if they heard me say that.)
Thanks, again!
-Viking Coder
Ha! This strikes me as obvious - "Look, we invented a way to muck up a file-system so badly that no other operating system would ever attempt to mount a drive like this, for fear of accidentally destroying it! Lets spend thousands of man-hours writing code to essentially encrypt a drive in such a way that it'll take a really long time for the open-source people to confidently say that they've figured out all of the ins and outs of our convoluted system! It'll make anyone who installs W2K fear ever installing another system!"
Also, swinging along parallel ropes of a known distance appart is nowhere near as hard as walking. If it could literally swing between oddly arranged branches, that'd be cool. But it's not. It's another interesting case study in "how animals move", but the lessons you can learn from this do not translate very easily into the world of walking robots.
They're fun, because I could see the power company making robots that walk along power lines, or some crazy thing. Imagine a ski lift that swings up the lines. Lots of weird, fun applications come to mind.
But, this robot is not a "big swing forward" in robot development. It's a very specific, not very useful instance of people with too much time trying to make a robot that does Yet Another Goofy Thing.
I emailed E*Trade, and asked them to donate to saving the chimps (which are apes, not monkeys, by the way). There was just an article today about how Jane Goodall's Gombe research facility is down to a 10 mile by 3 mile long strip of forest. Goodall speaks out against the use of chimps in commercials and movies, and I figure that the least E*Trade can do is to donate some. (They spent $2 Million on the ad, maybe they could drop a few hundred thousand on making the world a better place.) Especially considering that some people seem to think it was a great ad, and E*Trade will probably make a great deal of money off of it. I'd appreciate it if you gave them the same feedback. I know this is a tree-hugging kind of point to be making about a Super Bowl ad, but the chimps are screwed, unless they get some help. Also, isn't environmental preservation a nerd issue, too? It's nice to hack all day in front of a glowing screen, but it's also nice to know there's a world to go outside to, full of interesting animals, if you ever get the urge. *grin*
The FOF refers quite specifically to the browser wars, which for the most part were waged between competitors who were both offering free products.
The FOF talk about how a free product was a threat to Microsoft's Operating System as a platform. About how Microsoft used it's unbelievable wealth and power (it's monopoly) to kill Netscape, because it realized that a cross-platform development environment would weaken the strength of Windows as the only choice for the consumer.
Everyone talking loudly about the FOF and whether the government should have gotten involved seems to think that the monopoly case is about the Operating System Wars - Windows, Apple, BeOS, Linux, etc. The FOF, however, only refer to those other OSs to point out that Windows is the current clear winner. Given the OS strength that they have, they used their power to crush a competitor - Netscape.
Reading the portion of the FOF about how Microsoft screwed IBM makes me sad. I don't think IBM is the best company in the world, but if anyone could have defended themself, it would have been IBM. The FOF details how IBM lost hundreds of millions of dollars because Microsoft jerked them around.
Anyway, the Findings of Fact are easy to read, very interesting, very well written, very consice, and very damning for Microsoft.
I believe that this is the Internet's "Declaration of Independance." We will not allow Microsoft to exist as a monopoly, while abusing its power to kill competition.
Undoubtedly, some people would bend or break the rules of the game, either just for the joy of hacking, or in an attempt to gain skills or items in the game that are beyond their current means.
So, the next question is : is that a bad thing? I suppose that it is, under many circumstances, but I can imagine a game where part of the fun is to see how far you can hack the rules - within certain limits.