Well, it is a computer. The engine management system in your car is also a computer. This is an information appliance, just like the appliances that were released about a decade ago, but this one is done right and will sell. It's not designed to be like a general-purpose computing device, it's not designed to break like a general purpose computing device. This is probably the direction the computer industry is heading in: the vast majority of people use a web browser, office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation), video/audio player, photo viewer/manager and email. Only a minority of people use anything else. For most people, that is what makes a computer a computer, and they will be very happy with the iPad.
Actually, the 'single sheet aluminium case' being a non-user serviceable part thing is a myth. My MacBook Pro came with printed instructions in a little booklet telling my how to open the back panel and replace the hard drive. It did have strict instructions not to attempt to replace the battery, but when I opened the case the battery was right there next to the hard drive so I'm not really sure why they say that.
It drives me nuts every time I watch a DVD, and I use MythTV or VLC to watch DVDs for this reason: I bought the DVD, it's a random access medium and I should be able to start watching the film immediately. Any 'properly' licensed DVD player will force you to watch a long copyright message, various warnings, and sometime even a series of adverts before getting to the root menu. I find that intrusive, annoying, and a downgrade from VHS where I could hold the FF button down for 10 seconds to get past all of that. I find it particularly annoying when it's a DVD I really like and I'm watching it for the 3rd or 4th time, or when it's a series box-set and it does it with every disc change.
Your/you're is not a typographical error, it's an indication of a fundamental misunderstanding of the words being used. Your/you're and they're/their are far more basic errors of understanding than the use of a compound sentence, which is a more technical issue that involves understanding 'rules' of grammar in more detail; your/you're simply involves understanding what the words mean. As I was typing the above, I accidentally typed "your're", which was a typographical error and not an error of understanding, although if I hadn't noticed it I'm sure I would have been jumped on;).
So, it's an invasion of privacy to have your computer regularly sending information back to Microsoft about where you are (they know the IP address at least and the time, so can work it out pretty well), what hardware you have etc.. I know you're trolling, but there's other ways Microsoft could ensure only their customers can install patches, for instance the 'genuine advantage' software could run only when you want to download a patch - with a clear warning stating that information will be sent to Microsoft.
No... he purchased a copy of Windows, with a license to use it. That's where the sticking point is - just like when you purchase a book, the physical copy is your own, but that doesn't mean you have the right to read it out on the radio or adapt it as a screenplay.
Actually, this is something I have always disagreed with. Software development is nothing to do with IT, except that it uses IT. The idea that software development should be under IT seems to me to be the same as saying that electronics design should be under the building maintenance dept. because they deal with the electrical systems. Corporate IT (infrastructure / networking / servers / desktops / support) is a totally different thing to software development. I think one of the big mistakes in corporate IT is to make one big 'geek dept'.
Well, I'll sell it on to offset the cost of new hardware. Apple stuff usually depreciates less rapidly than PC equivalents;).
To be fair, Apple did make a mess of introducing the unified cable. At the time the new display came on the market, they were also selling the big Mac Pro workstation with DisplayPort connections. The Cinema Display lead is about 2 feet long, and it was very difficult to get hold of a DisplayPort extension, so people were spending 3000-4000 dollars on computer equipment and finding they had to put the massive tower case on the desk right next to the monitor.
You're confused. HDCP is available over DVI and HDMI, but is compulsory for neither. You need to use it if you wish to play source matierial that requires it. The only differences between DVI and HDMI (other than the form factor) are: HDMI supports audio in the same cable, DVI support analogue VGA in the same cable. Choose whichever is more convenient or supported by your equipment, and use adaptors if necesarry.
I nearly have this with my MacBook and Cinema Display now. One cable fans out to DisplayPort, USB and power. The USB connects to a hub in the back of the monitor for the printer etc., and also connects to the spearkers in the display and the webcam. It would be slightly nicer if there was one less connection to the MacBook but it wouldn't be a deal-breaker. I guess Apple would like to head to the point where one cable connects everything.
Looking at the article, it sounds as if he brought his own personal project in, not something for a science class. It sounds like he's a bit of an electronics nut, and brought something in to show his friends which the teachers then found suspicious. I can kind-of see both sides, but I don't think the boy has any blame. I used to do this all the time when I was at school, in fact I'm pretty sure the things we used to do during lunch break in the science and computer labs would get us suspended or arrested these days.
The problem is, you're coming across as defending that ridiculous Denon cable. Even if you can't buy off-the-shelf ethernet cable that's correctly twisted, for less than ten dollars and a pocket calculator you could easily construct a small selection of RJ45-RJ45 adaptors that would correct for the tiny length discrepancies of the common lengths of cables.
Really? Have you ever heard of antiretrovirals? There have also been many antihypertensives, antiepileptics and analgesics developed since the 1970s. Intensive care medicine (adult, paediatric and neonatal) has moved on in leaps and bounds since the 70's. I won't go on except to say you're profoundly wrong.
I disagree that "the concept of a cure is nonsensical". Your reversal is a bit like saying 'imagine someone can play guitar, and you had to teach them to be incapable of playing it...' - people who can play guitar can't un-learn it, but people who can't play guitar are capable of learning to play it to a greater or lesser degree. Someone with a severe physical disability may never be able to play guitar, depending on that disability.
In one sense I do understand what you mean, that the disorder is an intrinsic part of a person's makeup and not just a bolted-on impairment. However, ASD is a spectrum, and people sit in different places on that spectrum. For some, their ASD would make certain types of social interaction difficult, but not impossible, to process and understand - with patience, it is possible to extend the understanding and mastery of situations that would previously have been too distressing or just incomprehensible. It is therefore possible to 'cure' certain ASDs to the extent that a person is able to function 'normally' (whatever that means) in society and have a better quality of life than they would otherwise have had.
Your sentence "As a rule of thumb, if you can put together a fully formed sentence, you almost certainly don't have meaningful levels of ASD" indicates to me that you have a very little - or a very distorted - understanding of ASD (or you have constructed that sentence poorly and didn't really mean it). Lots of people are able to speak very well and enjoy conversation yet have significant ASD that affects every part of their life.
I actually use some old cheat and level codes as passwords. Unpronounceable, apparently gibberish to everyone else, and permanently embedded in my memory. Of course, I don't use codes from any well-known game, only very old and obscure ones from my Atari ST and ZX Spectrum days.
No, you're wrong. I buy tracks on iTunes and Amazon every day, which I could choose to illegally download or rip from a friend's CD. I even borrow a friend's iPod sometimes, listen to some tracks then go and pay to download the ones I like when I could quite easily copy the (DRM free) tracks straight off the hard drive. I believe in doing my best to comply with the law and pay people for the work they produce. I also believe (and this is not a contradiction) that copyright terms should be massively shortened, probably to no more than 20 years. The most effective answer to piracy is not more litigation, but to ensuring that music and movies are available cheaply and conveniently through legitimate channels.
Well, it can happen. My day job has nothing to do with IT other than regularly using email / web and word processing occasionally. But I have a background in IT and did a Computer Systems Engineering degree. When I make support calls I usually include a full description of the problem and step-by-step instructions on how to solve it. Most of the IT guys either love me or hate me. It's usually the guys that don't know how to do their jobs properly who hate me.
Does AD have any facility for client machines to push signed device drivers onto the server for backup? It would seem to me that with Microsoft putting so much emphasis on approved, signed drivers, it would be a real boon because then you wouldn't need images per machine, and could have an automated system for taking a stock image and adding the required device drivers to re-image a machine.
Well, you need a paradigm that's familiar. Cars have a common set of controls, but in different cars they might be in different places and work in slightly different ways. For most users, being able to use a mouse and understand icons and menus is sufficient, without needing things to work in an identical way.
Yes, I see your argument, and it's one that's commonly repeated. It's probably not that important to get worried about this particular word. However, there is some sense to rejecting words that ride roughshod over language conventions. In my field (medicine) a lot of words are derived from Latin and Greek. It's impossible for me to know everything about every condition, and every so often I see a patient with some obscure syndrome that I've never heard of. More often than not, I can figure out what it's vaguely about by thinking through the meaning of the name, which gives me an idea of where to start. 'Irregardless' is a terrible word because it has a built-in double negative. As I said, although that word itself doesn't matter that much, generally trying to keep the English language from being polluted with words that are intrinsically stupid is a good thing. English is famously full of irregular verbs, nouns borrowed from a whole host of other languages etc. - the more we can avoid the inherently ridiculous, the better.
Well, we live in a world in which copyright terms have been extended over and over, so in the absence of a parallel universe to compare with, we can only argue about this in theory. Look at the original point of the story summary: there are thousands of works that could/should have been public domain by now that aren't, which means that works that should be freely available to anyone are either unavailable (deleted works) or available at a cost that many can't pay. Also, those works should be available for remixing/mashups/sampling/fan fiction modification/etc., but aren't.
I would therefore argue that creativity flourishes in spite of the current copyright regime, not because of it. I'm not saying there should be no copyright at all, I'm saying that we've crossed well over the compromise point. My decrease figure isn't that there's somehow less songs/books/etc. in the world, I'm saying that there's a vast pool of untapped creativity that we could all be enjoying if not for the current system.
Just because something takes "weeks" doesn't mean that the inventor/discoverer (depending on how you see it) ought to be able to exclusively exploit it commercially for an indefinitely period of time.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it is a computer. The engine management system in your car is also a computer. This is an information appliance, just like the appliances that were released about a decade ago, but this one is done right and will sell. It's not designed to be like a general-purpose computing device, it's not designed to break like a general purpose computing device. This is probably the direction the computer industry is heading in: the vast majority of people use a web browser, office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation), video/audio player, photo viewer/manager and email. Only a minority of people use anything else. For most people, that is what makes a computer a computer, and they will be very happy with the iPad.
Actually, the 'single sheet aluminium case' being a non-user serviceable part thing is a myth. My MacBook Pro came with printed instructions in a little booklet telling my how to open the back panel and replace the hard drive. It did have strict instructions not to attempt to replace the battery, but when I opened the case the battery was right there next to the hard drive so I'm not really sure why they say that.
It drives me nuts every time I watch a DVD, and I use MythTV or VLC to watch DVDs for this reason: I bought the DVD, it's a random access medium and I should be able to start watching the film immediately. Any 'properly' licensed DVD player will force you to watch a long copyright message, various warnings, and sometime even a series of adverts before getting to the root menu. I find that intrusive, annoying, and a downgrade from VHS where I could hold the FF button down for 10 seconds to get past all of that. I find it particularly annoying when it's a DVD I really like and I'm watching it for the 3rd or 4th time, or when it's a series box-set and it does it with every disc change.
Your/you're is not a typographical error, it's an indication of a fundamental misunderstanding of the words being used. Your/you're and they're/their are far more basic errors of understanding than the use of a compound sentence, which is a more technical issue that involves understanding 'rules' of grammar in more detail; your/you're simply involves understanding what the words mean. As I was typing the above, I accidentally typed "your're", which was a typographical error and not an error of understanding, although if I hadn't noticed it I'm sure I would have been jumped on ;).
So, it's an invasion of privacy to have your computer regularly sending information back to Microsoft about where you are (they know the IP address at least and the time, so can work it out pretty well), what hardware you have etc.. I know you're trolling, but there's other ways Microsoft could ensure only their customers can install patches, for instance the 'genuine advantage' software could run only when you want to download a patch - with a clear warning stating that information will be sent to Microsoft.
No... he purchased a copy of Windows, with a license to use it. That's where the sticking point is - just like when you purchase a book, the physical copy is your own, but that doesn't mean you have the right to read it out on the radio or adapt it as a screenplay.
Actually, this is something I have always disagreed with. Software development is nothing to do with IT, except that it uses IT. The idea that software development should be under IT seems to me to be the same as saying that electronics design should be under the building maintenance dept. because they deal with the electrical systems. Corporate IT (infrastructure / networking / servers / desktops / support) is a totally different thing to software development. I think one of the big mistakes in corporate IT is to make one big 'geek dept'.
Well, I'll sell it on to offset the cost of new hardware. Apple stuff usually depreciates less rapidly than PC equivalents ;).
To be fair, Apple did make a mess of introducing the unified cable. At the time the new display came on the market, they were also selling the big Mac Pro workstation with DisplayPort connections. The Cinema Display lead is about 2 feet long, and it was very difficult to get hold of a DisplayPort extension, so people were spending 3000-4000 dollars on computer equipment and finding they had to put the massive tower case on the desk right next to the monitor.
You're confused. HDCP is available over DVI and HDMI, but is compulsory for neither. You need to use it if you wish to play source matierial that requires it. The only differences between DVI and HDMI (other than the form factor) are: HDMI supports audio in the same cable, DVI support analogue VGA in the same cable. Choose whichever is more convenient or supported by your equipment, and use adaptors if necesarry.
I nearly have this with my MacBook and Cinema Display now. One cable fans out to DisplayPort, USB and power. The USB connects to a hub in the back of the monitor for the printer etc., and also connects to the spearkers in the display and the webcam. It would be slightly nicer if there was one less connection to the MacBook but it wouldn't be a deal-breaker. I guess Apple would like to head to the point where one cable connects everything.
Looking at the article, it sounds as if he brought his own personal project in, not something for a science class. It sounds like he's a bit of an electronics nut, and brought something in to show his friends which the teachers then found suspicious. I can kind-of see both sides, but I don't think the boy has any blame. I used to do this all the time when I was at school, in fact I'm pretty sure the things we used to do during lunch break in the science and computer labs would get us suspended or arrested these days.
The problem is, you're coming across as defending that ridiculous Denon cable. Even if you can't buy off-the-shelf ethernet cable that's correctly twisted, for less than ten dollars and a pocket calculator you could easily construct a small selection of RJ45-RJ45 adaptors that would correct for the tiny length discrepancies of the common lengths of cables.
Really? Have you ever heard of antiretrovirals? There have also been many antihypertensives, antiepileptics and analgesics developed since the 1970s. Intensive care medicine (adult, paediatric and neonatal) has moved on in leaps and bounds since the 70's. I won't go on except to say you're profoundly wrong.
I disagree that "the concept of a cure is nonsensical". Your reversal is a bit like saying 'imagine someone can play guitar, and you had to teach them to be incapable of playing it...' - people who can play guitar can't un-learn it, but people who can't play guitar are capable of learning to play it to a greater or lesser degree. Someone with a severe physical disability may never be able to play guitar, depending on that disability.
In one sense I do understand what you mean, that the disorder is an intrinsic part of a person's makeup and not just a bolted-on impairment. However, ASD is a spectrum, and people sit in different places on that spectrum. For some, their ASD would make certain types of social interaction difficult, but not impossible, to process and understand - with patience, it is possible to extend the understanding and mastery of situations that would previously have been too distressing or just incomprehensible. It is therefore possible to 'cure' certain ASDs to the extent that a person is able to function 'normally' (whatever that means) in society and have a better quality of life than they would otherwise have had.
Your sentence "As a rule of thumb, if you can put together a fully formed sentence, you almost certainly don't have meaningful levels of ASD" indicates to me that you have a very little - or a very distorted - understanding of ASD (or you have constructed that sentence poorly and didn't really mean it). Lots of people are able to speak very well and enjoy conversation yet have significant ASD that affects every part of their life.
I actually use some old cheat and level codes as passwords. Unpronounceable, apparently gibberish to everyone else, and permanently embedded in my memory. Of course, I don't use codes from any well-known game, only very old and obscure ones from my Atari ST and ZX Spectrum days.
No, you're wrong. I buy tracks on iTunes and Amazon every day, which I could choose to illegally download or rip from a friend's CD. I even borrow a friend's iPod sometimes, listen to some tracks then go and pay to download the ones I like when I could quite easily copy the (DRM free) tracks straight off the hard drive. I believe in doing my best to comply with the law and pay people for the work they produce. I also believe (and this is not a contradiction) that copyright terms should be massively shortened, probably to no more than 20 years. The most effective answer to piracy is not more litigation, but to ensuring that music and movies are available cheaply and conveniently through legitimate channels.
Well, it can happen. My day job has nothing to do with IT other than regularly using email / web and word processing occasionally. But I have a background in IT and did a Computer Systems Engineering degree. When I make support calls I usually include a full description of the problem and step-by-step instructions on how to solve it. Most of the IT guys either love me or hate me. It's usually the guys that don't know how to do their jobs properly who hate me.
Does AD have any facility for client machines to push signed device drivers onto the server for backup? It would seem to me that with Microsoft putting so much emphasis on approved, signed drivers, it would be a real boon because then you wouldn't need images per machine, and could have an automated system for taking a stock image and adding the required device drivers to re-image a machine.
Well, you need a paradigm that's familiar. Cars have a common set of controls, but in different cars they might be in different places and work in slightly different ways. For most users, being able to use a mouse and understand icons and menus is sufficient, without needing things to work in an identical way.
Thanks! I've been looking for that algorithm for ages. I'm presuming it's BSD-licensed?
Yes, I see your argument, and it's one that's commonly repeated. It's probably not that important to get worried about this particular word. However, there is some sense to rejecting words that ride roughshod over language conventions. In my field (medicine) a lot of words are derived from Latin and Greek. It's impossible for me to know everything about every condition, and every so often I see a patient with some obscure syndrome that I've never heard of. More often than not, I can figure out what it's vaguely about by thinking through the meaning of the name, which gives me an idea of where to start. 'Irregardless' is a terrible word because it has a built-in double negative. As I said, although that word itself doesn't matter that much, generally trying to keep the English language from being polluted with words that are intrinsically stupid is a good thing. English is famously full of irregular verbs, nouns borrowed from a whole host of other languages etc. - the more we can avoid the inherently ridiculous, the better.
Yeah, but it's murder getting support.
Irregardless is nonsense caused by confusion between the words irrespective and regardless.
Well, we live in a world in which copyright terms have been extended over and over, so in the absence of a parallel universe to compare with, we can only argue about this in theory. Look at the original point of the story summary: there are thousands of works that could/should have been public domain by now that aren't, which means that works that should be freely available to anyone are either unavailable (deleted works) or available at a cost that many can't pay. Also, those works should be available for remixing/mashups/sampling/fan fiction modification/etc., but aren't.
I would therefore argue that creativity flourishes in spite of the current copyright regime, not because of it. I'm not saying there should be no copyright at all, I'm saying that we've crossed well over the compromise point. My decrease figure isn't that there's somehow less songs/books/etc. in the world, I'm saying that there's a vast pool of untapped creativity that we could all be enjoying if not for the current system.
Just because something takes "weeks" doesn't mean that the inventor/discoverer (depending on how you see it) ought to be able to exclusively exploit it commercially for an indefinitely period of time.