Paying 3 million dollars for 30 seconds of television time. And it wasn't even funny!!! I am jaded, forgive me, but damn, not as impressive as it could have been. I imagine the majority of people are familiar with the suggestive search, what market segment were they going for?
I had a feeling I would get at least one response along these lines. Let me clarify the situation, IMO.
"continually regressing in the moral and ethical obligations"
I am not proclaiming that there was a bygone golden age where everything was awesome. The word "regress" was chosen carefully for the sole fact that, yes, in this year 2010, there has been significant progress made in the United States and across the world in regards to the treatment of humanity on an ethical and moral scale. Each year that transpires produces an ever increasing sum of philosophical ideologies that could increase the standard of living for most of mankind. Amidst these discoveries and continual improvements by societies intellectuals, world governments continually ignore or simply forget these quality addendum's to the standard moral code of human life in the sake of profit. There never was a golden age of humanity. There probably never will be. But the fact remains that countless individuals and organizations refine and better our understanding of sociological problems on a yearly basis, yet world governments pay little to no regard to these developments.
So, this "mantra" rings true in my opinion. In a world that is always increasing its intellectual capabilities through technology, increasing its ability to disseminate academic information, increasing its ability to research, study, examine, and postulate different solutions to different problems, there is a moral and ethical decline in part of the governments, and it is in fact a regression, a back tracking, a one-step-forward-to-steps-back, because it seems regardless of any ideological developments being made, their implementation is residually ignored over time in leu of the motivation of profit.
This just goes to show what levels of disclosure and topics of discussion will be sacrificed in the name of securing commercial and privatized interest. Business as usual, nothing to see here folks, move along...
This is the nature of the beast, and the trend in globalization. I am seeing countries continually regressing in the moral and ethical obligations, a degradation of honesty, transparency, and openness all in the name of making more money. Will we ever see the end of these practices? I don't believe in my lifetime, if ever.
Follow this link. No game playing aficionado should miss it, especially if they subscribe to O'Reilly's banter. And if you hate O'Reilly, this will be perfect ammo for the next time you encounter a follower of his punditing. Bill O'Reilly Slams PS3 Launch, Gamers, iPods, Digital Tech (not in that order). He is an idiot, and nor relevant at all.
Wishful thinking. What makes them believe anybody will adopt? The general theme I gather from the Slashdot community is that the preexisting design aesthetic (if you can even call it that) for the internet is actually pretty solid, its just the implementation that people & organizations botch. The IPv6 bandwagon isn't about to collapse from all its passengers now, is it?
The folks who generally engineered the internet had decent enough foresight from a technical standpoint. It is the BIG Telco's and all their 'peering', 'filtering', 'throttling', and combined unwillingness to invest in new infrastructure that puts the choke hold on our tubes (pun intended). Do you expect the major Tier 1's to drop billions of $$$ to adopt, 'cuz I sure as hell don't.
I think I can justify your comment in the IT corporate America world, but in the general, uneducated/computer-illiterate public, there is definitely a stagnant fear of users to play with interfaces/click things in which they do not know the result. I have heard many family members/elderly/uninformed talk as if clicking the wrong thing will "break-it". This fear then feeds into the purchasing decision of getting an apple, its new and unknown. Its a large reason apple doesn't hold more market share in the corporate & desktop realm. People get familiar with their operating systems, websites, and programs, but only to the extent they need. I bet you their are millions of grandma's who would never click 'defragment' because it is an intimidatingly unknown word, while millions of office workers would have to problem clicking things like 'defragment' or 'plot-regression' or whatnot, because they understand it.
Is it me, or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Don't Be Evil' policy? Personally, I think they operate well within moral bounds, but to a lot of major networks, blogs, and news aggregates, the opposite seems to be opines.
In principle, most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while, if at all. Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well. Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful? Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information, IMO, seems to be working great for them. The naysayers neigh, but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic, open-source friendly, charitable, and hospitable, I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service.
How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model? If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way, Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out, and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue. Something to think about...
Its a terrible A-Frame relationship. We owe them billions. Yet they gross billions in GDP from money and loans we can't secure nor back. Give it time, the system will collapse, hard.
The game is rigged to explode, it seems. And nobody of importance seems to be making headway elsewise. Sigh...
FYI, meselfs was not up to date on the litigation history of RAMBUS, but it seems that the right of passage for companies whose products become vapor/obsolete-ware is to fire the engineers and hire the lawyers. Go DDRTROLLRAM (tm)(c) 2010 RAMBUS Corp. All Rights Reserved.
IMHO District 9 was an equally biting movie with its critical viewpoint to modern day government censorship and control, as an aside I wonder how that movie went over in the People's Republic of Corruption.
I had the misfortune of working for what was Firedog and also GeekSquad in high school. Both organizations are SALES based, not service. I walked on the job all googly eyed thinking it would be some wiz-bang-pop techno extravanganza, but in reality it is a constant banter from upper management chanting "sell more services", and IMO generally at the cost of quality of information conveyed to the customer.
Their exist a definitive rift between the tech savvy and the cup-holder-cd-tray-croud, but rarely will a mass marketed consumer company be open and fair in its practices, exspecially when they have the upper advantage of capitalizing on the ignorance of many.
I burned all the blue and red shirts once I resigned both post. May the Maths forgive me for my trespasses with those conglomerates.
This sort of scenario is being to pervade society. Algorithmically generated data delivered to algorithmicaly centric channels, with decisions being made by some programmers handiwork or some suit's business "logic", society's ability to rationalize, analyze, and pontificate is being systematically eroded.
How much longer until roves of professors are wandering rusted train-tracks, remembering the once visceral world of fine-grained literature? The more we eliminate our own 'humanity' from the processes of life, the faster we eliminate life from humanity.
We all know that theory can be notoriously variable when put into practice. In theory, quantum in particular, your wave function places your probability of spontaneously appearing in a parallel universe as magnificantly insignificant, yet its a "theorhetically possible". Knowing such, it should not be a surprise when such a powerful and not fully-understood "proof-of-concept" implementation is shown to be flawed, there are things we cannot master, and possibilities that cannot be ruled out. No security measure will ever be truly "perfect".
The best password encryption can be broken with a hard-hack, Louisville Sluggers provide a great brute-force technique.
Even if this purple unicorn was possible, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they can pull off everything they claim on server-side, as packets trickle from conglomerate to backbone and up and down the tiers of ISP's, JohnDoeNet Inc. will not appreciate such a surge in traffic if this became popular. Facebook is one thing, but streaming 'HD' video alongside a bunch of gaming data, good luck. I have had multiple ISPs (local and national) enforce a cap on my bandwidth because of comparitively lightweight PC games. I call VaporWare.
I thought the days of using buzzword dot-commyness for the sake of luring investors died ten years ago. Some folks never learn.
Sure, the patent office has it rough, sorting a gajillion [technical term] applicants all wanting a patent for their "unique idea", with the majority really just wanting a foothold for litigation riches. Don't get me wrong, there are definitely honest attempts at securing one's interests and not getting your own pride and joy "unique idea" stolen, but I'll be damned if the USTPO hasn't awarded some of the dumbest, most wide-ranging generalizations to companies that patent spam thousands upon thousands a year. The latter mentioned issue has been going on long before the dawn of the digital, so I feel its too late to correct the problem in the current system.
'I am really happy and lucky. I have made $75,000 in only 38 days since I joined the "company."
Sounds eerily familiar to the emails I find in my spam box. I wonder if the investors have to participate in 2 out of 3 other pirate offers to qualify.
but in a typewriter, it is that unique hardware that gives a signature output, whereas in the computer the software used for creation is largely homogeneous, hence the appreciation differences between the two overall technologies.
But the actual physical materials are unique to that machine. The software in a computer is generally not, hence the difference in material value, unless you want to pay for Steven Kings MS Office serial number. If a large demand for writer's office-suite serial numbers arises on Ebay, my shortsightedness shall be duly noted.
From a purely utilitarian standpoint, both devices serve their purpose, but rarity is a key factor in determining value.
The line of delineation between using a computer to generate content versus using a typewriter to generate content falls in a distinct areas.
Computers run facsimile copies of software used for utilitarian output.
Typewriters 'run' a unique hardware, the hardware defining the output, not the software.
It is the uniqueness in the typewritter's 'software', the individual nuts and bolds and keys and whatnot that make it unique.
You can reformat a computer, change its keyboard, mouse, monitor, practically everything, and the essence of that computer is lost much more easily through this ease of replacement. The typewriter is generally more impervious to this component interchangeability conformism.
Also creative process dynamics come into play, the fact that you can produce a literary classic with a purely mechanical system is almost whimsical, while computers lose their uniqueness factor with most software just being a literal copy.
Pedants will mod me down saying that this is just the progression of technology, but would you rather own a Ford Taurus owned by Richard Stallman or a horse carriage owned by a lesser known person of history?
Then again, people offered thousands of dollars for Michael Jackson's white glove, nullifying my argument perhaps.
FTA: "The FAA said at that time the source of the computer software malfunction was a "packet switch" that "failed due to a database mismatch."
We all know how large out of touch behemoths sometimes structure their IT. By 'packet switch' they mean 'guy who couriers hardcopy flight plans' and by 'database mistmatch' they mean their dewey-decimal-system was mixed-up by some jokesters.
Slashdot Mirror
( [Average copypasta time] x [Desired Lines of Code] / [Averages Lines Per Chunk] ) x K K = Constant of Desired Inneficiency
Paying 3 million dollars for 30 seconds of television time. And it wasn't even funny!!! I am jaded, forgive me, but damn, not as impressive as it could have been. I imagine the majority of people are familiar with the suggestive search, what market segment were they going for?
I had a feeling I would get at least one response along these lines. Let me clarify the situation, IMO.
"continually regressing in the moral and ethical obligations"
I am not proclaiming that there was a bygone golden age where everything was awesome. The word "regress" was chosen carefully for the sole fact that, yes, in this year 2010, there has been significant progress made in the United States and across the world in regards to the treatment of humanity on an ethical and moral scale. Each year that transpires produces an ever increasing sum of philosophical ideologies that could increase the standard of living for most of mankind. Amidst these discoveries and continual improvements by societies intellectuals, world governments continually ignore or simply forget these quality addendum's to the standard moral code of human life in the sake of profit. There never was a golden age of humanity. There probably never will be. But the fact remains that countless individuals and organizations refine and better our understanding of sociological problems on a yearly basis, yet world governments pay little to no regard to these developments.
So, this "mantra" rings true in my opinion. In a world that is always increasing its intellectual capabilities through technology, increasing its ability to disseminate academic information, increasing its ability to research, study, examine, and postulate different solutions to different problems, there is a moral and ethical decline in part of the governments, and it is in fact a regression, a back tracking, a one-step-forward-to-steps-back, because it seems regardless of any ideological developments being made, their implementation is residually ignored over time in leu of the motivation of profit.
This just goes to show what levels of disclosure and topics of discussion will be sacrificed in the name of securing commercial and privatized interest. Business as usual, nothing to see here folks, move along...
This is the nature of the beast, and the trend in globalization. I am seeing countries continually regressing in the moral and ethical obligations, a degradation of honesty, transparency, and openness all in the name of making more money. Will we ever see the end of these practices? I don't believe in my lifetime, if ever.
Follow this link. No game playing aficionado should miss it, especially if they subscribe to O'Reilly's banter. And if you hate O'Reilly, this will be perfect ammo for the next time you encounter a follower of his punditing. Bill O'Reilly Slams PS3 Launch, Gamers, iPods, Digital Tech (not in that order). He is an idiot, and nor relevant at all.
Wishful thinking. What makes them believe anybody will adopt? The general theme I gather from the Slashdot community is that the preexisting design aesthetic (if you can even call it that) for the internet is actually pretty solid, its just the implementation that people & organizations botch. The IPv6 bandwagon isn't about to collapse from all its passengers now, is it?
The folks who generally engineered the internet had decent enough foresight from a technical standpoint. It is the BIG Telco's and all their 'peering', 'filtering', 'throttling', and combined unwillingness to invest in new infrastructure that puts the choke hold on our tubes (pun intended). Do you expect the major Tier 1's to drop billions of $$$ to adopt, 'cuz I sure as hell don't.
My mental reference of FT'ing things that shouldn't be FT'ed: XKCD 26
Security:
;)
Fourier Transform FT( Internet ) - Security through obscurity, it won't make any sense!
Reliability:
Mobius Transform MT( Internet) - You always end up where you start, SynAckishly
Collaboration:
Wavelet Transform WT ( Internet) - Make it a design ideology, Google's got it
I think I can justify your comment in the IT corporate America world, but in the general, uneducated/computer-illiterate public, there is definitely a stagnant fear of users to play with interfaces/click things in which they do not know the result. I have heard many family members/elderly/uninformed talk as if clicking the wrong thing will "break-it". This fear then feeds into the purchasing decision of getting an apple, its new and unknown. Its a large reason apple doesn't hold more market share in the corporate & desktop realm. People get familiar with their operating systems, websites, and programs, but only to the extent they need. I bet you their are millions of grandma's who would never click 'defragment' because it is an intimidatingly unknown word, while millions of office workers would have to problem clicking things like 'defragment' or 'plot-regression' or whatnot, because they understand it.
In summary, it is sometimes this case.
*opined*. I am sure there is more, but Grammar Nazis be damned.
Is it me, or has Google started to slide in the media towards away from its 'Don't Be Evil' policy? Personally, I think they operate well within moral bounds, but to a lot of major networks, blogs, and news aggregates, the opposite seems to be opines.
In principle, most want their usage statistics retained for a short-while, if at all. Most prefer their statistics only confided with first channel of contact as well. Are people considering that these mass usage statistics may comprise some of the magic that makes their platform so successful and useful? Continual refinement due to constant sources of usage information, IMO, seems to be working great for them. The naysayers neigh, but until I see a genuine effort by other companies to be as philanthropic, open-source friendly, charitable, and hospitable, I will shelve my skepticism and contempt for their nosiness in hopes of a continually great service.
How much would people complain if search became a pay-per-search model? If all those in favor of eliminating usage-statistics completely had their way, Ad-Words and dynamic advertising content would be out, and these search giants would be looking for another form of revenue. Something to think about...
Its a terrible A-Frame relationship. We owe them billions. Yet they gross billions in GDP from money and loans we can't secure nor back. Give it time, the system will collapse, hard.
The game is rigged to explode, it seems. And nobody of importance seems to be making headway elsewise. Sigh...
FYI, meselfs was not up to date on the litigation history of RAMBUS, but it seems that the right of passage for companies whose products become vapor/obsolete-ware is to fire the engineers and hire the lawyers. Go DDRTROLLRAM (tm)(c) 2010 RAMBUS Corp. All Rights Reserved.
IMHO District 9 was an equally biting movie with its critical viewpoint to modern day government censorship and control, as an aside I wonder how that movie went over in the People's Republic of Corruption.
I had the misfortune of working for what was Firedog and also GeekSquad in high school. Both organizations are SALES based, not service. I walked on the job all googly eyed thinking it would be some wiz-bang-pop techno extravanganza, but in reality it is a constant banter from upper management chanting "sell more services", and IMO generally at the cost of quality of information conveyed to the customer.
Their exist a definitive rift between the tech savvy and the cup-holder-cd-tray-croud, but rarely will a mass marketed consumer company be open and fair in its practices, exspecially when they have the upper advantage of capitalizing on the ignorance of many.
I burned all the blue and red shirts once I resigned both post. May the Maths forgive me for my trespasses with those conglomerates.
This sort of scenario is being to pervade society. Algorithmically generated data delivered to algorithmicaly centric channels, with decisions being made by some programmers handiwork or some suit's business "logic", society's ability to rationalize, analyze, and pontificate is being systematically eroded. How much longer until roves of professors are wandering rusted train-tracks, remembering the once visceral world of fine-grained literature? The more we eliminate our own 'humanity' from the processes of life, the faster we eliminate life from humanity.
We all know that theory can be notoriously variable when put into practice. In theory, quantum in particular, your wave function places your probability of spontaneously appearing in a parallel universe as magnificantly insignificant, yet its a "theorhetically possible". Knowing such, it should not be a surprise when such a powerful and not fully-understood "proof-of-concept" implementation is shown to be flawed, there are things we cannot master, and possibilities that cannot be ruled out. No security measure will ever be truly "perfect".
The best password encryption can be broken with a hard-hack, Louisville Sluggers provide a great brute-force technique.
Even if this purple unicorn was possible, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they can pull off everything they claim on server-side, as packets trickle from conglomerate to backbone and up and down the tiers of ISP's, JohnDoeNet Inc. will not appreciate such a surge in traffic if this became popular. Facebook is one thing, but streaming 'HD' video alongside a bunch of gaming data, good luck. I have had multiple ISPs (local and national) enforce a cap on my bandwidth because of comparitively lightweight PC games. I call VaporWare.
I thought the days of using buzzword dot-commyness for the sake of luring investors died ten years ago. Some folks never learn.
Sure, the patent office has it rough, sorting a gajillion [technical term] applicants all wanting a patent for their "unique idea", with the majority really just wanting a foothold for litigation riches. Don't get me wrong, there are definitely honest attempts at securing one's interests and not getting your own pride and joy "unique idea" stolen, but I'll be damned if the USTPO hasn't awarded some of the dumbest, most wide-ranging generalizations to companies that patent spam thousands upon thousands a year. The latter mentioned issue has been going on long before the dawn of the digital, so I feel its too late to correct the problem in the current system.
DROP tblOracle FROM mysql; UPDATE tblBadIdeas SET Oracle = true; INSERT INTO tblYourVagina (MyPenis) VALUES ('FUN'); query language is tehfunzors!
'I am really happy and lucky. I have made $75,000 in only 38 days since I joined the "company."
Sounds eerily familiar to the emails I find in my spam box. I wonder if the investors have to participate in 2 out of 3 other pirate offers to qualify.
but in a typewriter, it is that unique hardware that gives a signature output, whereas in the computer the software used for creation is largely homogeneous, hence the appreciation differences between the two overall technologies.
But the actual physical materials are unique to that machine. The software in a computer is generally not, hence the difference in material value, unless you want to pay for Steven Kings MS Office serial number. If a large demand for writer's office-suite serial numbers arises on Ebay, my shortsightedness shall be duly noted.
From a purely utilitarian standpoint, both devices serve their purpose, but rarity is a key factor in determining value. The line of delineation between using a computer to generate content versus using a typewriter to generate content falls in a distinct areas. Computers run facsimile copies of software used for utilitarian output. Typewriters 'run' a unique hardware, the hardware defining the output, not the software. It is the uniqueness in the typewritter's 'software', the individual nuts and bolds and keys and whatnot that make it unique. You can reformat a computer, change its keyboard, mouse, monitor, practically everything, and the essence of that computer is lost much more easily through this ease of replacement. The typewriter is generally more impervious to this component interchangeability conformism.
Also creative process dynamics come into play, the fact that you can produce a literary classic with a purely mechanical system is almost whimsical, while computers lose their uniqueness factor with most software just being a literal copy.
Pedants will mod me down saying that this is just the progression of technology, but would you rather own a Ford Taurus owned by Richard Stallman or a horse carriage owned by a lesser known person of history?
Then again, people offered thousands of dollars for Michael Jackson's white glove, nullifying my argument perhaps.
FTA: "The FAA said at that time the source of the computer software malfunction was a "packet switch" that "failed due to a database mismatch."
We all know how large out of touch behemoths sometimes structure their IT. By 'packet switch' they mean 'guy who couriers hardcopy flight plans' and by 'database mistmatch' they mean their dewey-decimal-system was mixed-up by some jokesters.