As a summer internship, I had the opportunity to work for one of the only refiners of Tellurium in the US, they happen to be a large copper refinery.
Tellurium is indeed a rare element, but the value of tellurium was nearly nill only a few years ago. Refineries that were capturing the tellurium were literally throwing it away. Their rate of recovery hardly reflected the $200/lb that it currently trades at in the US.
In other words, while I know that it is still a very rare element, I also know that we have the capability to recover a far higher percentage of tellurium if the demand stays high.
This is the mentality that is so counter-productive.
It doesn't matter if the games have gotten cheaper or more expensive. Game companies need to be maximizing profit with their price points, not just pointing to the fact that they have dropped in price.
The Recording Industry makes the same mistakes. They frequently point out that CD Albums were more expensive(when adjusted for inflation) than they are now. Great, but who cares? Would you be making more or less profit if you dropped the price by X amount of dollars?
If software companies made more money by selling their produce for 10x the current price, then they should do that. If they made more money by selling at half the current price, then they should do that.
It gets particularly tricky with online game play. Popularity of a title will have an immediate effect on future popularity. World of Warcraft is a perfect example of this fact. Its current success built on its prior success. Why play WoW instead of another MMO? Because WoW has the most players. It might behoove a company to sell a heavily multiplayer game at a lower price than a single-player game.
This isn't the first time this has happened either. Remember NFL 2k5? Sega dropped their price down to $20. Not because it was a budget game, but because they want to maximize units sold. They succeeded. They were so successful that EA bought out the rights to the NFL video games to stop Sega. I thought I remembered hearing that Sega was making a fair amount of money on 2k5 vs prior years
We can cover half of the moon with solar panels, and provide all of the Earth's energy.
Then the Earth will only be without power 50% of the time, when the moon rotates.
Wait, I know the solution... Cover the ENTIRE moon with solar panels.
Ignore the fact that the energy required to cover the moon with solar panels is absolutely insane. Also ignore the fact that there are MASSIVE areas of the Earth that could much more easily be covered with solar panels without seriously upsetting anyone. Yeah, if we ignore reason and common sense, we can propose all kind of nifty ideas. How about we build WARP drives and mine use the FORCE? It makes about as much sense!!!!
Have you heard about the new computer interface devices called "mice"? They try to interface with a computer via movement of the device across a flat surface rather than just typing in a command. Absolutely useless, and I bet they don't work worth a crap
"There is no evidence that people want to use these things."--John Dvorak(discussing the computer mouse)
Actually...a successful hybrid is capable of reproduction (and a small percentage of unsuccessful hybrids, like the liger, are capable of reproduction)
Species is defined by the ABILITY to interbreed... Seperation of species is not defined by the lack of interbreeding.
In fact, using the entire interbreeding thing is a bit antiquated.
I understand your anger, but I think it is severely misplaced.
"Creationist" is a term. Terms have definitions. While languages are fluid and definitions can change over time, definitions still exist.
A Creationist is someone who believes in the biblical "creation". Their are two main subsets of creationism. 1) Young Earth Creationist(YEC)-believes that the Earth is 6,000 years old 2) Old Earth Creationist(OEC)-believes that the Earth is much older. OEC argues that the "7 days of creation" were not representative of a standard day, but rather a general term for the passing of time
Both groups agree on the same basic things: God created life God created all of the animals God created man seperately The bible is totally true in its explanation of the beginning
"Some creationists believe that evolution happened, but is way to complicated to have happened by chance." This is absolutely wrong and self-conflicting "evolution" implies that random mutations and natural selection were responsible for the outcome. If God(or whoever) guided the development of organisms and performed some cosmic form of animal husbandry, then it sure wasn't evolution.
You seem to really miss the fact that words have specific meanings. You don't get to decide to just co-opt words to do whatever you want. Creationism=biblical creation story is 100% true Evolution=the unguided change and adaptation of biological organisms
You can believe whatever you want, but you don't get to make up your own definition for words!
"99.9% of them will make stupid decisions at some point regarding sex."
Are you serious? 99.9%? Have a lot of problems as a kid?
You could have said "99.9% of them will have sex" That makes a lot more sense, and sex is more of a temptation than violence. However, sex is a temptation because you are biologically designed to be a 'sex machine'(thanks James Brown). I don't think seeing a nipple or a penis in a movie is going to change a chaste angel into a raging slut,
At the same time: "99.9% of kids won't commit murder regardless of what movies they watch" They may not murder, but you will have a higher rate of violent crime. They might fight, stab, rob, etc
In the end, I think I would rather have America's children experimenting with sex rather than violence. You might be different, but I would rather walk in on my daughter having sex with a young boy than walk in my daughter stabbing someone!
Have you ever used a Kindle or Sony reader? It sure doesn't sound like it
I read them all the times in low-light situations. The only time I specifically need a light is when I am reading in bed, and then I just turn on a desk lamp.
"The iPhone has subpixel antialiased text on a high-resolution 163 ppi LED backlit screen. No flicker. No eyestrain. It's actually a joy to read."
So it has the same resolution as the Kindle. It also "flickers" at about 60Hz, my Sony Reader is solid. It has NO "flickering" Active displays (like LCD screens) will always cause a bit of eyestrain. It doesn't matter if you think Steve Jobs is the second-coming of Jesus Christ. Your iphone screen is "flickering"
I will challenge you to do something though. Read your iphone while sitting outside. Even better, try reading your Iphone while wearing polarized sunglasses You can't...I can read a Kindle though
"It's actually a joy to read" I bet it is great to read a book on something that is smaller than the palm of my hand. It is too small, and considering the complete lack of hard buttons to turn the page...I bet turning a 500 page book into a 3000 page document is amazing. I bet it is also fun to charge your book reader every day.
Here is the point.... My coworkers and I have wonderfully expensive LCD monitors. We still print documents out all the time to make them easier to read. An Iphone can be used to read a book, in fact I have used them to read books. They are wonderfully convenient. However, I have to make compromises when I want to read a book on an Iphone. Just like I have to make compromises when I want to use an IPhone for email. It works, but it isn't AS GOOD as using a computer with a keyboard
E-ink is as good as paper. It has the advantage of being able to store many more pages per inch of thickness. E-ink/paper does have limitations....but nothing is "better" than paper.
"And it's geeky enough to be reading a Kindle on a train or in a restaurant WITHOUT sticking a LED booklight on the stupid thing." It is just as geeky to be reading a real book. Except that it is smaller and less obtrusive to be using the Kindle. Oh, and Sony just came out with a flat light that fits unobtrusively onto the Sony PRS-505.
I just want to be clear, Amazon and Sony could add a light to their readers, but it would have to be a front-light. People have a lot of different preferences when it comes to front-lighting something. Some people like indirect light, some people prefer direct light. Some people like white-LED light, while others prefer the yellow light of a bulb. I fully understand why neither one "built-in" a booklight that can be purchased for $5....especially with so many people having different preferences.
Tivo has some very unique and "non-obvious" patents. Tivo also has some VERY OBVIOUS patents. Tivo does not hold the patent on "time-shifting" or digital "time shifting"(the ability to record and watch a slightly delayed version or 'pause' live-tv. Tivo sued Dish Network over a patent involving DVR and the use of an on-screen guide. The problem? Dish Network's use of the on-screen guide predates Tivo. So, if DVRs are an existing technology and the onscreen guide is an existing technology...combining the two is OBVIOUS
Tivo makes a great product with many unique features, but they shouldn't hold a patent on the digital video recorder. Think of any other piece of consumer electronics..... We didn't give a patent to Compaq for the concept of a "portable computer" for making a computer that was portable We didn't give a patent Fujitsu for making a "plasma television" for combining a plasma display with a television We didn't give a patent to IBM for the CPU
We don't grant patents for ideas that anyone could have thought up in 5 minutes. We give patents for specific implementations of an idea. Tivo is claiming that they have a blanket patent on the entire concept of a DVR, or at least they have a patent on anything beyond simply storing digital media on a hard drive.
Satellite vs. Tivo is different than Cable vs. Tivo. Tivo has a legitimate claims that they developed the idea of converting analog signals to timeshift on digital media. Satellite is already digital. They simply buffer the streaming signal.
Lack of a backlight? Yeah...just like a real piece of paper. You don't backlight e-ink, you frontlight it. Buy an LED booklight. Hell, Sony sells a fairly fancy book light.
Page turn? Have you used the newer e-ink? Trust me, page turns are much faster now. I have the old PRS-500 sony reader and the page turns are slow. My girlfriend has the newer 505, and I can promise you that the page turn is fast.
I used to read ebooks on an LCD screen. It sucked. My eyes would hurt after awhile. I couldn't fall asleep reading a book. The screen was insanely small, and a laptop was too big to carry around.
I must first agree with several other posters, the slashdot summary is incredibly slanted when compared with the actual comments made by Michael Reiss.
That being said, it isn't stupid that people are trying to get him fired. This is similar to the situation in Texas when a member of the education board was dismissed for speaking out against creationism. It isn't as much an issue of what is being said, and more of an issue of who is speaking. Michael Reiss addressed an inflammatory and incredibly hot topic. He made comments that could easily be twisted and misinterpreted, as SLASHDOT did, and he made these comments without discussing his public opinion piece with the rest of the royal society.
Let me provide an analogy. It is unethical for a CFO to cook the books. It would be unethical to fire an accountant because he refused to lie. However, it would be an entirely different issue if an accountant for a major company wrote an article claiming that he thought that "company X" was a failure and that he thought they would be bankrupt within a year. Get the difference?
I am an EE, but when I was in college I had a CS professor who required that we handwrite our code.
It was only for in class exams, but it would frequently be a page or two of code(C++)
Do you have any idea how easy it is to make a mistake handwriting code? You think regular writing is more prone to error when it is handwritten, just imagine all of the little syntax stuff you could screw up.
Whatever geek told you that it was against the laws of physics to move large amounts of heat with small amounts of energy was an idiot.
You can obviously move large amounts of heat with little energy. In fact, one responder was even wrong to suggest that you need energy to "move" heat. Thermal energy moves by itself. According to the laws of thermodynamics, it will move from higher heat to an area of lower heat.(i.e. Your coffee gets colder the longer you leave it sitting there).
Going back to computers. Technically you need no energy to cool a computer. The chip will get hot, and because it is warmer than the surroundings it will radiate heat.
However, the amount of heat that can be dissipated into the surroundings is fairly simple to calculate. It is a result of the heat of the chip and the heat of the surroundings. If you wish to move heat at a higher rate, then you will need to input your own energy into the equation.
This is very basic thermodynamics.
Now, lets go back to this car in question. They are claiming that water can be used to "create" energy. This is impossible. Water is the RESULT of energy release. It requires energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen.
So, according to the company making this false claim... Water + NO energy = Hydrogen and Oxygen Hydrogen + Oxygen = Energy + Water
This would essentially be a formula for unlimited energy. This is why they are claiming that this is impossible. It doesn't violate some nerds limited knowledge of physics, it violates some of the most basic principles of physics.
Are you insane? You have the free time to stand outside of a store and handout CDs? Hey, I love linux, firefox, and openoffice...but I also love for people to think that I am sane and rational.
All standing outside a Mac Store or Best Buy will accomplish is to have the police called because some crazy idiot is handing out suspected pornography.
Hey, some people may be dumb enough to click on the attachment in an email from a person that they do not know, but wouldn't it be far stupider to take a burned CD from a complete stranger and put it in your computer?
Ah...so this is what Col. Pickering did after he got done with Professor Higgins.
So this must be a finishing institute for young girls. They are taken out of the streets, as young "gutter-snipes" and taught their vowels. Their final exam is a royal ball where they must behave as "proper young ladies".
If the guests at the ball figure out you are from the gutter...then you fail. If they don't...you pass If they think you are Hungarian...you pass with honors.
Yeah, but knowing Dish Network...they probably weren't interested in paying someone for technology that they developed.
The entire patent is bogus. Tivo combined time-shifting with a digital storage device and an on-screen guide. Hmmm. Time-shifting is not patented by tivo. Digital storage of video is not patented by tivo. Dish Network and DirecTV actually hold prior art on the on-screen guide. This seemed like a fairly obvious usage of common technologies.
Remember. Dish Network is the same company that turned all Viacom channels off for a few weeks because they didn't want to give in to pushy business practices by Viacom. I am not saying this is good or bad, but I am saying that Charlie Ergen(Dish CEO) has big testicles.
So, I doubt it was that Tivo asked for too much money. I think the fact that TIVO asked for money at all would have put them off.
Let me try to clear it up, since I live in Lubbock, TX.
The cameras were installed
When the statistics were reviewed, it was found that the intersections which had cameras were now MORE dangerous, despite the fact that city-wide traffic incidents had been on the decline.
Lubbock's city government has been desperately trying to fight a constant tide of facts that prove that they create more of a public safety problem than they help.
However, you must remember this is Lubbock. A college town that decided to curb drinking by requiring all beer/liquor stores are in a single location. It has no effect on alcohol consumption, but has led to a rather dangerous situation when hundreds of people try to "beat the clock" to get there before the store closes. It helps that half of them are drunk.
The ignorance of creationists never ceases to amaze me.
The average Creationist believes that there is a wealth of information to refute evolution. They base this belief on a rather simple idea. They believe Evolution must be false, and if it is false their must be a lot of data out their to confirm this view. This is known as "begging the question"
In a perfect world, I would be completely in favor of allowing science teachers to teach whatever they want, as long as it is science. However, creationists have become rather sneaky. You know it and I know it. They will try to exploit the system and teach a religious ideology as scientific fact.
I have a novel idea.... Let this bill pass, and let all bills like it pass(as long as they only stipulate that a teacher COULD teach an alternative). Instead of focusing on this bill, we should focus on a bill that requires all science teachers to have a degree in SCIENCE. Almost 100% of biologists know that the theory of evolution is accurate... Any idiot teacher who is trying to teach "Intelligent Design" rather than Evolutionary Theory probably has a degree in Education rather than a degree in biology.
Better yet, pass a bill that requires all secondary level science classes to TEST any theory being presented in class. This should be fairly simple(you could make it an exception that exceedingly complex theories can be TESTED via analyzing another famous test). It would give the kids hands-on experience with science, and it would make it impossible to teach Intelligent Design or creationism in class.... Heck, if a teacher was insistent that Evolution didn't occur...I would love to see the look on her face when it happened in her classroom.
Eh...I don't know if discussing abiotic evolution in conjunction with evolutionary theory is a good idea.
Evolution is a term, and in fact something very similar to biological evolution occurs in almost all systems. However, they are only connected via a general trend towards equilibrium. Biological evolution is a unique form of evolution that follows several unique properties.
Stellar evolution does not follow the same rules as biological evolution, though they can both be described similarly. When Darwinian theory was new on the scene, we saw Darwin's Theory of Evolution applied to all typed of abiotic systems. Social Darwinism is one example, but it was also applied to economics, chemistry, geology, and even rivers...
I believe the fear is that scientists don't want to go down that road again. The Theory of Evolution is a biological theory...Most systems do evolve, but typically by a different set of rules.
So I don't think it is a cop out, but rather a desire to maintain separation and avoid misapplication.
No, it is that Linux isn't advertised much, just about everyone has something that runs Linux, however they usually don't know it. And it isn't more technically challenging if you haven't used a computer however because MS has drilled into peoples head computer==PC==Windows, they think that the Windows way of doing anything is better and because its not on shiny new hardware like a Mac they think it should behave just like Windows. Yeah, I still disagree. Which is viewed as more technically challenging, an electric motor or a combustion engine? The combustion engine. However, almost everyone has something that uses a combustion engine.
Just because everyone owns a device that "runs linux" doesn't mean that people will view it as "less challenging". Now, I am not saying that it is more challenging. I am saying that people see it as such.
I know that it seems paradoxical, but the average person considers a system with more flexibility to be more complex. Linux is more flexible than Windows, and people assume it is also more complex.
Compatibility with what? MS's OEM contracts that prevent Linux from being sold? Most hardware works out of the box with Linux then Windows ever does, take a blank Windows install with a blank Ubuntu install and see that Ubuntu detects more hardware then Windows does, its just that most people have Windows pre-installed which will change with the rise of low-cost desktops running Linux. Quick example:
I recently converted to Ubuntu(and I love it), but I was trying to connect to a network that required PEAP authentication. Windows could handle this out of the box, but Ubuntu could not. I also had similar problems with my wireless card(though Windows required a driver install).
Now, why was I able to install a driver for Windows but not for Ubuntu? The wireless adapter manufacturer was far more concerned with making their windows customers happy. I know that I cannot blame Linux for this, but this is what I was referring to when I was talking about compatibility. Just like it is easier to find accessories for an Ipod than any other MP3 player.
don't see what you are meaning, most people have to pay third parties to (re) install Windows for them because it is so difficult. They also pay them to remove viruses/malware which is common in the Windows world. If we would compare the users doing the same tasks they pay other people to do with Windows with Linux, Linux is much easier, its just that the can't do it with Windows but yet if they can't do it in Linux suddenly Windows is more user-friendly. This seems to be the biggest complaint of the Linux community. "The only reason people think Windows is easier is because more people use windows". EXACTLY. I never was discussing the actual Linux operating system. I was discussing the perceived Linux operating system. There is a huge gulf between the real OS and the perceived OS. The biggest difference? People THINK that it is more complicated and difficult to use. I told you why they think this way, and unfortunately they are not aspects you can quickly change.
It also helps that most people use their computers recreationally. Every operating system in existence can play media, browse the web, and edit documents. Those tasks are so simple, that they all do it equally well. So, which OS is more popular amongst gamers? Windows Which one runs the most popular IM software(via the actual IM client)? Windows Why? Because they have the largest market share, which sucks..... But guess what? Most people would rather have a computer that can play Gears of War than a computer that doesn't have any viruses. Is that stupid? Maybe...Is it true? Absolutely
Might it be that Linux is considered more technically challenging by the common person?
Might it be that the only people who promote Linux avidly are computer nerds?
Might it be that since Linux is less popular than Windows, Linux has a compatibility issue?
I am sure Linux is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but sliced bread sucks. Linux is the best, if you know what you are doing. Windows is the best, if your computer expert is a 12-year-old kid.
I am sure plenty of people will be upset with this comment, but really think about it first. Most people would rather purchase the product with all of the pretty packaging from a big company. It might suck, but people are generally idiots.
Product recognition goes a long way in influencing customer decisions. Linux is seen as the "Nerd OS" and Windows is seen as the "regular person's OS". It is as simple as that, and it is going to be nearly impossible to change that opinion.
This doesn't seem to have much to do with limiting the Olympians personal freedoms. The Olympics have signed deals with sponsors, media organizations, and others. It seems that the limit on blogging is designed to protect the legal agreements that the IOC has signed with others. It also seems that they are trying to avoid any potential, if accidental, violations of other athletes rights.
This seems to be a pretty standard deal. This isn't limiting the rights of human beings, this is limiting the actions of Olympic competitors. They are allowed to go do whatever they want, but if they break the rules they are no longer Olympic competitors.
I am a little confused on this point. Sony has lost a lot of format wars, but rarely have they lost because of poor quality.
Betamax had superior video quality when compared to VHS Hi-8 was technically better than VHS-C Minidisc was an intelligent solution to cheap portable storage Atrac was actually a better format for portable devices than MP3
Also that little idea known as the "Compact Disc" seems to be very popular still... I think the 3.5" floppy disc did alright...
Sony has had some trouble with the severe limits they place on their proposed "formats", but they are also usually the best format.
It isn't exactly crackpot, especially when applied to hydrocarbons on Titan.
We know that oil can be created without 'dead dinosaurs'. It is rejected because of evidence on Earth that points towards the idea that oil is the byproduct of biomass.
However, if most geologists were told that oil had been discovered on another planet then they would probably assume it was non-organic. We only assume it is organic because of other factors.
So, quit confusing people. It is crackpot to think that oil on Earth is abiogenic. It is perfectly sane and rational to think that hydrocarbons on another planet are the result of abiogenic processes.
Slashdot Mirror
As a summer internship, I had the opportunity to work for one of the only refiners of Tellurium in the US, they happen to be a large copper refinery.
Tellurium is indeed a rare element, but the value of tellurium was nearly nill only a few years ago. Refineries that were capturing the tellurium were literally throwing it away. Their rate of recovery hardly reflected the $200/lb that it currently trades at in the US.
In other words, while I know that it is still a very rare element, I also know that we have the capability to recover a far higher percentage of tellurium if the demand stays high.
This is the mentality that is so counter-productive.
It doesn't matter if the games have gotten cheaper or more expensive. Game companies need to be maximizing profit with their price points, not just pointing to the fact that they have dropped in price.
The Recording Industry makes the same mistakes. They frequently point out that CD Albums were more expensive(when adjusted for inflation) than they are now. Great, but who cares? Would you be making more or less profit if you dropped the price by X amount of dollars?
If software companies made more money by selling their produce for 10x the current price, then they should do that. If they made more money by selling at half the current price, then they should do that.
It gets particularly tricky with online game play. Popularity of a title will have an immediate effect on future popularity. World of Warcraft is a perfect example of this fact. Its current success built on its prior success. Why play WoW instead of another MMO? Because WoW has the most players.
It might behoove a company to sell a heavily multiplayer game at a lower price than a single-player game.
This isn't the first time this has happened either. Remember NFL 2k5? Sega dropped their price down to $20. Not because it was a budget game, but because they want to maximize units sold. They succeeded. They were so successful that EA bought out the rights to the NFL video games to stop Sega. I thought I remembered hearing that Sega was making a fair amount of money on 2k5 vs prior years
Brilliant idea.
We can cover half of the moon with solar panels, and provide all of the Earth's energy.
Then the Earth will only be without power 50% of the time, when the moon rotates.
Wait, I know the solution...
Cover the ENTIRE moon with solar panels.
Ignore the fact that the energy required to cover the moon with solar panels is absolutely insane. Also ignore the fact that there are MASSIVE areas of the Earth that could much more easily be covered with solar panels without seriously upsetting anyone.
Yeah, if we ignore reason and common sense, we can propose all kind of nifty ideas. How about we build WARP drives and mine use the FORCE? It makes about as much sense!!!!
I agree...
Have you heard about the new computer interface devices called "mice"? They try to interface with a computer via movement of the device across a flat surface rather than just typing in a command. Absolutely useless, and I bet they don't work worth a crap
"There is no evidence that people want to use these things."--John Dvorak(discussing the computer mouse)
Useless and silly technology!
Actually...a successful hybrid is capable of reproduction
(and a small percentage of unsuccessful hybrids, like the liger, are capable of reproduction)
Species is defined by the ABILITY to interbreed...
Seperation of species is not defined by the lack of interbreeding.
In fact, using the entire interbreeding thing is a bit antiquated.
I understand your anger, but I think it is severely misplaced.
"Creationist" is a term. Terms have definitions. While languages are fluid and definitions can change over time, definitions still exist.
A Creationist is someone who believes in the biblical "creation". Their are two main subsets of creationism.
1) Young Earth Creationist(YEC)-believes that the Earth is 6,000 years old
2) Old Earth Creationist(OEC)-believes that the Earth is much older. OEC argues that the "7 days of creation" were not representative of a standard day, but rather a general term for the passing of time
Both groups agree on the same basic things:
God created life
God created all of the animals
God created man seperately
The bible is totally true in its explanation of the beginning
"Some creationists believe that evolution happened, but is way to complicated to have happened by chance."
This is absolutely wrong and self-conflicting
"evolution" implies that random mutations and natural selection were responsible for the outcome.
If God(or whoever) guided the development of organisms and performed some cosmic form of animal husbandry, then it sure wasn't evolution.
You seem to really miss the fact that words have specific meanings. You don't get to decide to just co-opt words to do whatever you want.
Creationism=biblical creation story is 100% true
Evolution=the unguided change and adaptation of biological organisms
You can believe whatever you want, but you don't get to make up your own definition for words!
"99.9% of them will make stupid decisions at some point regarding sex."
Are you serious?
99.9%? Have a lot of problems as a kid?
You could have said "99.9% of them will have sex"
That makes a lot more sense, and sex is more of a temptation than violence. However, sex is a temptation because you are biologically designed to be a 'sex machine'(thanks James Brown). I don't think seeing a nipple or a penis in a movie is going to change a chaste angel into a raging slut,
At the same time:
"99.9% of kids won't commit murder regardless of what movies they watch"
They may not murder, but you will have a higher rate of violent crime.
They might fight, stab, rob, etc
In the end, I think I would rather have America's children experimenting with sex rather than violence. You might be different, but I would rather walk in on my daughter having sex with a young boy than walk in my daughter stabbing someone!
Have you ever used a Kindle or Sony reader?
It sure doesn't sound like it
I read them all the times in low-light situations.
The only time I specifically need a light is when I am reading in bed, and then I just turn on a desk lamp.
"The iPhone has subpixel antialiased text on a high-resolution 163 ppi LED backlit screen. No flicker. No eyestrain. It's actually a joy to read."
So it has the same resolution as the Kindle.
It also "flickers" at about 60Hz, my Sony Reader is solid. It has NO "flickering"
Active displays (like LCD screens) will always cause a bit of eyestrain. It doesn't matter if you think Steve Jobs is the second-coming of Jesus Christ. Your iphone screen is "flickering"
I will challenge you to do something though.
Read your iphone while sitting outside.
Even better, try reading your Iphone while wearing polarized sunglasses
You can't...I can read a Kindle though
"It's actually a joy to read"
I bet it is great to read a book on something that is smaller than the palm of my hand.
It is too small, and considering the complete lack of hard buttons to turn the page...I bet turning a 500 page book into a 3000 page document is amazing.
I bet it is also fun to charge your book reader every day.
Here is the point....
My coworkers and I have wonderfully expensive LCD monitors. We still print documents out all the time to make them easier to read.
An Iphone can be used to read a book, in fact I have used them to read books. They are wonderfully convenient.
However, I have to make compromises when I want to read a book on an Iphone. Just like I have to make compromises when I want to use an IPhone for email. It works, but it isn't AS GOOD as using a computer with a keyboard
E-ink is as good as paper.
It has the advantage of being able to store many more pages per inch of thickness.
E-ink/paper does have limitations....but nothing is "better" than paper.
"And it's geeky enough to be reading a Kindle on a train or in a restaurant WITHOUT sticking a LED booklight on the stupid thing."
It is just as geeky to be reading a real book. Except that it is smaller and less obtrusive to be using the Kindle.
Oh, and Sony just came out with a flat light that fits unobtrusively onto the Sony PRS-505.
I just want to be clear, Amazon and Sony could add a light to their readers, but it would have to be a front-light.
People have a lot of different preferences when it comes to front-lighting something. Some people like indirect light, some people prefer direct light. Some people like white-LED light, while others prefer the yellow light of a bulb. I fully understand why neither one "built-in" a booklight that can be purchased for $5....especially with so many people having different preferences.
I think you missed the point.
Tivo has some very unique and "non-obvious" patents. Tivo also has some VERY OBVIOUS patents.
Tivo does not hold the patent on "time-shifting" or digital "time shifting"(the ability to record and watch a slightly delayed version or 'pause' live-tv.
Tivo sued Dish Network over a patent involving DVR and the use of an on-screen guide.
The problem?
Dish Network's use of the on-screen guide predates Tivo.
So, if DVRs are an existing technology and the onscreen guide is an existing technology...combining the two is OBVIOUS
Tivo makes a great product with many unique features, but they shouldn't hold a patent on the digital video recorder.
Think of any other piece of consumer electronics.....
We didn't give a patent to Compaq for the concept of a "portable computer" for making a computer that was portable
We didn't give a patent Fujitsu for making a "plasma television" for combining a plasma display with a television
We didn't give a patent to IBM for the CPU
We don't grant patents for ideas that anyone could have thought up in 5 minutes. We give patents for specific implementations of an idea. Tivo is claiming that they have a blanket patent on the entire concept of a DVR, or at least they have a patent on anything beyond simply storing digital media on a hard drive.
Satellite vs. Tivo is different than Cable vs. Tivo.
Tivo has a legitimate claims that they developed the idea of converting analog signals to timeshift on digital media.
Satellite is already digital. They simply buffer the streaming signal.
Lack of a backlight?
Yeah...just like a real piece of paper. You don't backlight e-ink, you frontlight it. Buy an LED booklight. Hell, Sony sells a fairly fancy book light.
Page turn?
Have you used the newer e-ink?
Trust me, page turns are much faster now. I have the old PRS-500 sony reader and the page turns are slow. My girlfriend has the newer 505, and I can promise you that the page turn is fast.
I used to read ebooks on an LCD screen. It sucked. My eyes would hurt after awhile. I couldn't fall asleep reading a book. The screen was insanely small, and a laptop was too big to carry around.
I must first agree with several other posters, the slashdot summary is incredibly slanted when compared with the actual comments made by Michael Reiss.
That being said, it isn't stupid that people are trying to get him fired. This is similar to the situation in Texas when a member of the education board was dismissed for speaking out against creationism. It isn't as much an issue of what is being said, and more of an issue of who is speaking. Michael Reiss addressed an inflammatory and incredibly hot topic. He made comments that could easily be twisted and misinterpreted, as SLASHDOT did, and he made these comments without discussing his public opinion piece with the rest of the royal society.
Let me provide an analogy.
It is unethical for a CFO to cook the books. It would be unethical to fire an accountant because he refused to lie.
However, it would be an entirely different issue if an accountant for a major company wrote an article claiming that he thought that "company X" was a failure and that he thought they would be bankrupt within a year.
Get the difference?
I am an EE, but when I was in college I had a CS professor who required that we handwrite our code.
It was only for in class exams, but it would frequently be a page or two of code(C++)
Do you have any idea how easy it is to make a mistake handwriting code?
You think regular writing is more prone to error when it is handwritten, just imagine all of the little syntax stuff you could screw up.
The ; was the death of me....
Whatever geek told you that it was against the laws of physics to move large amounts of heat with small amounts of energy was an idiot.
You can obviously move large amounts of heat with little energy. In fact, one responder was even wrong to suggest that you need energy to "move" heat. Thermal energy moves by itself. According to the laws of thermodynamics, it will move from higher heat to an area of lower heat.(i.e. Your coffee gets colder the longer you leave it sitting there).
Going back to computers. Technically you need no energy to cool a computer. The chip will get hot, and because it is warmer than the surroundings it will radiate heat.
However, the amount of heat that can be dissipated into the surroundings is fairly simple to calculate. It is a result of the heat of the chip and the heat of the surroundings. If you wish to move heat at a higher rate, then you will need to input your own energy into the equation.
This is very basic thermodynamics.
Now, lets go back to this car in question. They are claiming that water can be used to "create" energy. This is impossible. Water is the RESULT of energy release. It requires energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen.
So, according to the company making this false claim...
Water + NO energy = Hydrogen and Oxygen
Hydrogen + Oxygen = Energy + Water
This would essentially be a formula for unlimited energy. This is why they are claiming that this is impossible. It doesn't violate some nerds limited knowledge of physics, it violates some of the most basic principles of physics.
Are you insane?
You have the free time to stand outside of a store and handout CDs?
Hey, I love linux, firefox, and openoffice...but I also love for people to think that I am sane and rational.
All standing outside a Mac Store or Best Buy will accomplish is to have the police called because some crazy idiot is handing out suspected pornography.
Hey, some people may be dumb enough to click on the attachment in an email from a person that they do not know, but wouldn't it be far stupider to take a burned CD from a complete stranger and put it in your computer?
Ah...so this is what Col. Pickering did after he got done with Professor Higgins.
So this must be a finishing institute for young girls. They are taken out of the streets, as young "gutter-snipes" and taught their vowels. Their final exam is a royal ball where they must behave as "proper young ladies".
If the guests at the ball figure out you are from the gutter...then you fail.
If they don't...you pass
If they think you are Hungarian...you pass with honors.
Sorry...I couldn't resist.
Yeah, but knowing Dish Network...they probably weren't interested in paying someone for technology that they developed.
The entire patent is bogus. Tivo combined time-shifting with a digital storage device and an on-screen guide. Hmmm. Time-shifting is not patented by tivo. Digital storage of video is not patented by tivo. Dish Network and DirecTV actually hold prior art on the on-screen guide. This seemed like a fairly obvious usage of common technologies.
Remember. Dish Network is the same company that turned all Viacom channels off for a few weeks because they didn't want to give in to pushy business practices by Viacom. I am not saying this is good or bad, but I am saying that Charlie Ergen(Dish CEO) has big testicles.
So, I doubt it was that Tivo asked for too much money. I think the fact that TIVO asked for money at all would have put them off.
Let me try to clear it up, since I live in Lubbock, TX. The cameras were installed When the statistics were reviewed, it was found that the intersections which had cameras were now MORE dangerous, despite the fact that city-wide traffic incidents had been on the decline. Lubbock's city government has been desperately trying to fight a constant tide of facts that prove that they create more of a public safety problem than they help. However, you must remember this is Lubbock. A college town that decided to curb drinking by requiring all beer/liquor stores are in a single location. It has no effect on alcohol consumption, but has led to a rather dangerous situation when hundreds of people try to "beat the clock" to get there before the store closes. It helps that half of them are drunk.
The ignorance of creationists never ceases to amaze me.
The average Creationist believes that there is a wealth of information to refute evolution. They base this belief on a rather simple idea. They believe Evolution must be false, and if it is false their must be a lot of data out their to confirm this view.
This is known as "begging the question"
In a perfect world, I would be completely in favor of allowing science teachers to teach whatever they want, as long as it is science. However, creationists have become rather sneaky. You know it and I know it. They will try to exploit the system and teach a religious ideology as scientific fact.
I have a novel idea....
Let this bill pass, and let all bills like it pass(as long as they only stipulate that a teacher COULD teach an alternative).
Instead of focusing on this bill, we should focus on a bill that requires all science teachers to have a degree in SCIENCE.
Almost 100% of biologists know that the theory of evolution is accurate...
Any idiot teacher who is trying to teach "Intelligent Design" rather than Evolutionary Theory probably has a degree in Education rather than a degree in biology.
Better yet, pass a bill that requires all secondary level science classes to TEST any theory being presented in class.
This should be fairly simple(you could make it an exception that exceedingly complex theories can be TESTED via analyzing another famous test). It would give the kids hands-on experience with science, and it would make it impossible to teach Intelligent Design or creationism in class....
Heck, if a teacher was insistent that Evolution didn't occur...I would love to see the look on her face when it happened in her classroom.
Eh...I don't know if discussing abiotic evolution in conjunction with evolutionary theory is a good idea.
Evolution is a term, and in fact something very similar to biological evolution occurs in almost all systems. However, they are only connected via a general trend towards equilibrium. Biological evolution is a unique form of evolution that follows several unique properties.
Stellar evolution does not follow the same rules as biological evolution, though they can both be described similarly.
When Darwinian theory was new on the scene, we saw Darwin's Theory of Evolution applied to all typed of abiotic systems. Social Darwinism is one example, but it was also applied to economics, chemistry, geology, and even rivers...
I believe the fear is that scientists don't want to go down that road again.
The Theory of Evolution is a biological theory...Most systems do evolve, but typically by a different set of rules.
So I don't think it is a cop out, but rather a desire to maintain separation and avoid misapplication.
Which is viewed as more technically challenging, an electric motor or a combustion engine? The combustion engine.
However, almost everyone has something that uses a combustion engine.
Just because everyone owns a device that "runs linux" doesn't mean that people will view it as "less challenging". Now, I am not saying that it is more challenging. I am saying that people see it as such.
I know that it seems paradoxical, but the average person considers a system with more flexibility to be more complex. Linux is more flexible than Windows, and people assume it is also more complex. Compatibility with what? MS's OEM contracts that prevent Linux from being sold? Most hardware works out of the box with Linux then Windows ever does, take a blank Windows install with a blank Ubuntu install and see that Ubuntu detects more hardware then Windows does, its just that most people have Windows pre-installed which will change with the rise of low-cost desktops running Linux. Quick example:
I recently converted to Ubuntu(and I love it), but I was trying to connect to a network that required PEAP authentication. Windows could handle this out of the box, but Ubuntu could not.
I also had similar problems with my wireless card(though Windows required a driver install).
Now, why was I able to install a driver for Windows but not for Ubuntu? The wireless adapter manufacturer was far more concerned with making their windows customers happy. I know that I cannot blame Linux for this, but this is what I was referring to when I was talking about compatibility. Just like it is easier to find accessories for an Ipod than any other MP3 player. don't see what you are meaning, most people have to pay third parties to (re) install Windows for them because it is so difficult. They also pay them to remove viruses/malware which is common in the Windows world. If we would compare the users doing the same tasks they pay other people to do with Windows with Linux, Linux is much easier, its just that the can't do it with Windows but yet if they can't do it in Linux suddenly Windows is more user-friendly. This seems to be the biggest complaint of the Linux community. "The only reason people think Windows is easier is because more people use windows". EXACTLY.
I never was discussing the actual Linux operating system. I was discussing the perceived Linux operating system.
There is a huge gulf between the real OS and the perceived OS. The biggest difference? People THINK that it is more complicated and difficult to use. I told you why they think this way, and unfortunately they are not aspects you can quickly change.
It also helps that most people use their computers recreationally. Every operating system in existence can play media, browse the web, and edit documents. Those tasks are so simple, that they all do it equally well. So, which OS is more popular amongst gamers? Windows
Which one runs the most popular IM software(via the actual IM client)? Windows
Why? Because they have the largest market share, which sucks.....
But guess what? Most people would rather have a computer that can play Gears of War than a computer that doesn't have any viruses. Is that stupid? Maybe...Is it true? Absolutely
Might it be that Linux is considered more technically challenging by the common person?
Might it be that the only people who promote Linux avidly are computer nerds?
Might it be that since Linux is less popular than Windows, Linux has a compatibility issue?
I am sure Linux is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but sliced bread sucks. Linux is the best, if you know what you are doing. Windows is the best, if your computer expert is a 12-year-old kid.
I am sure plenty of people will be upset with this comment, but really think about it first. Most people would rather purchase the product with all of the pretty packaging from a big company. It might suck, but people are generally idiots.
Product recognition goes a long way in influencing customer decisions. Linux is seen as the "Nerd OS" and Windows is seen as the "regular person's OS". It is as simple as that, and it is going to be nearly impossible to change that opinion.
Freedom of the press?
This doesn't seem to have much to do with limiting the Olympians personal freedoms. The Olympics have signed deals with sponsors, media organizations, and others. It seems that the limit on blogging is designed to protect the legal agreements that the IOC has signed with others. It also seems that they are trying to avoid any potential, if accidental, violations of other athletes rights.
This seems to be a pretty standard deal.
This isn't limiting the rights of human beings, this is limiting the actions of Olympic competitors. They are allowed to go do whatever they want, but if they break the rules they are no longer Olympic competitors.
You are upset that Sony's format won?
I am a little confused on this point. Sony has lost a lot of format wars, but rarely have they lost because of poor quality.
Betamax had superior video quality when compared to VHS
Hi-8 was technically better than VHS-C
Minidisc was an intelligent solution to cheap portable storage
Atrac was actually a better format for portable devices than MP3
Also that little idea known as the "Compact Disc" seems to be very popular still...
I think the 3.5" floppy disc did alright...
Sony has had some trouble with the severe limits they place on their proposed "formats", but they are also usually the best format.
It isn't exactly crackpot, especially when applied to hydrocarbons on Titan.
We know that oil can be created without 'dead dinosaurs'. It is rejected because of evidence on Earth that points towards the idea that oil is the byproduct of biomass.
However, if most geologists were told that oil had been discovered on another planet then they would probably assume it was non-organic. We only assume it is organic because of other factors.
So, quit confusing people. It is crackpot to think that oil on Earth is abiogenic. It is perfectly sane and rational to think that hydrocarbons on another planet are the result of abiogenic processes.
those three little dots really allow you to skew a sentence.
Let me demonstrate
To be...that is..nobler...
Kinda changes Hamlet's meaning, don't you think?