Haha! Whoever left that parens out deserves to be tasered. Maybe next season Chloe will use this vulnerability -- instead of the machine-coded matrix -- to do something impossible.
Stavatti Percussion conducts the retail sale of percussion products Stavatti's founder and current CEO, Christopher R. Beskar, plays the bagpipes. Early in his piping career, Mr. Beskar joined a bagpipe band. This band was in need of drummers to play the snare in accompaniment of the pipes. Mr. Beskar's brother Shawn joined the band and became an accomplished pipe band snare drummer capable of Grade 2 competition while yet in High School. Later on, Shawn became CFO of Stavatti. While serving as CFO, Shawn began marketing Premier Pipe Band Products under a business entity designated DSDC.
and: "We know what threats are out there. A 9mm just won't cut it when you are facing 30 ft tall insectoids, or the reptile alien overlords from Rigel."
Is it possible that this device does not exist? I think it might be fake, because this month's Wired (not online yet) features this product on a page of what appear to be creations of the future -- not devices that actually exist. (I just glanced at the page, but that was my interpretation of it.) Where is the actual page at RSAC that describes this device or research? I couldn't find it, and it's not mentioned among their research projects. Sorry if I was careless and just missed it. The thing in Wired is on their "Fetish" page, but the issue's theme is in part *future* developments. The BSAC "keyboard" is illustrated by some MEMS glued onto somebody's hand, but it says "Available in 2004" or some such. It's next to an AT&T "Crib-ready" webcam and a sleek remote-control helicopter that has a camera attached to it. In other words, I think Wired may have "invented" all these products, including the BSAC keyboard, for purposes of this millennial issue of their magazine. Can anyone actually confirm whether it is real or fake?
I think this story is slipping under the radar of the NYT, Reuters, AP, etc., b/c they don't really understand what it means -- esp. what it means to Apple loyalists.
Let's say Microsoft announced Windows 2000, and Windows 2000 Special Edition, and the SE version was $100 more, but 50% faster. They have a big event saying, "We've broken new ground with the speed and features of Windows 2000 SE". They accept thousands of orders for it, and then, a month later, say "Sorry, but to all of you people who ordered Windows 2000 SE, we're actually going to send you regular old Windows, 50% slower, but we're still going to charge you the same price."
The differences b/t that and what Apple just did are negligible.
Slashdot Mirror
Haha! Whoever left that parens out deserves to be tasered. Maybe next season Chloe will use this vulnerability -- instead of the machine-coded matrix -- to do something impossible.
You can all get back to work now.
Is it possible that this device does not exist? I think it might be fake, because this month's Wired (not online yet) features this product on a page of what appear to be creations of the future -- not devices that actually exist. (I just glanced at the page, but that was my interpretation of it.) Where is the actual page at RSAC that describes this device or research? I couldn't find it, and it's not mentioned among their research projects. Sorry if I was careless and just missed it. The thing in Wired is on their "Fetish" page, but the issue's theme is in part *future* developments. The BSAC "keyboard" is illustrated by some MEMS glued onto somebody's hand, but it says "Available in 2004" or some such. It's next to an AT&T "Crib-ready" webcam and a sleek remote-control helicopter that has a camera attached to it. In other words, I think Wired may have "invented" all these products, including the BSAC keyboard, for purposes of this millennial issue of their magazine. Can anyone actually confirm whether it is real or fake?
I think this story is slipping under the radar of the NYT, Reuters, AP, etc., b/c they don't really understand what it means -- esp. what it means to Apple loyalists.
Let's say Microsoft announced Windows 2000, and Windows 2000 Special Edition, and the SE version was $100 more, but 50% faster. They have a big event saying, "We've broken new ground with the speed and features of Windows 2000 SE". They accept thousands of orders for it, and then, a month later, say "Sorry, but to all of you people who ordered Windows 2000 SE, we're actually going to send you regular old Windows, 50% slower, but we're still going to charge you the same price."
The differences b/t that and what Apple just did are negligible.