Right, they want it. They want a job so they can make money so they won't starve.
You prefer that we let them starve instead? These are people that are willing to suffer from chemical poisoning because it is better than the alternative. I agree with them, it is better than the alternative -- starving.
If this is cheap enough, I can see it being somewhat useful as a desktop computer. I can even see such a keyboard/computer being useful for a portable gaming rig if it had a faster processor and a decent video adapter. However, they instead seem to be marketing it for the HTPC market in which area I expect it to be an utter flop. My HTPC is great because I can throw my keyboard, replace the batteries once a year, etc. This unit will have to be charged daily, handled very carefully (don't have kids!) and otherwise be a nuisance in the living room.
Finally, I can see this also being a neat, useful item if it was a standard keyboard with the screen controlled by the host computer via a USB video adapter. Again, something this won't do but would make it a great and marketable product.
There are some great ideas and use-cases here, but they're picking all the wrong ones!
The small guys do this too, to be honest. In my town, we have two small mom and pop coffee shops that are open for a few hours a day in the morning. They are not open when I'm looking for entertainment, and they don't provide internet (which if they did, I might go there earlier). In the biggest intersection in town, the corners consist of two gas stations, a park, and an empty lot (which is quite an eye-sore). Starbucks wanted to open there, but the small coffee shops lobbied to prevent the township from allowing the permits to build.
While generally, I would prefer having local businesses as opposed to mega-corporations like Starbucks, I cannot support local businesses that simply refuse to complete.
I once came across something similar where a small restaurant couldn't even sell brewed coffee because of a Starbucks in the shopping center! Likewise, Starbucks had a contract with the landlord...
My point isn't only that computer generated images will be realistic, which I understand is already the case to a certain degree, but the fact that real photographs may be "turned into" non-realistic images that are indistinguishable from drawn cartoons.
We're already at the point where it would make sense to begin auditing how these images are created, because visual verification is increasingly difficult or impossible -- in both directions. Likewise, it is not immediately obvious which images are of minors are which are not, not only to judges but to casual laypeople that might wander onto the wrong website. Only through auditing and accounting information, available and usable by laypeople, can people protect themselves from legal liability.
Of course, I'm assuming here, of course, that the majority of people agree with me that computer generated or hand-drawn drawn cartoons or computer images should not be considered as child pornography. This fact is, of course, what is very much on discussion here today, but I wonder how many people are looking to outlaw cartoon images simply because they cannot be distinguished from real images which have been doctored to look like cartoons, thus painting the law with broad strokes?
The underlying problem that is worrying many, I believe, is that as technology advances it will become increasingly difficult to distinguish between real photographs and cartoons. They're be indistinguishable. This goes in both directions, in making real images look like cartoons, and in making cartoons that look like real photographs. While there might still be ways to forensically determine if an image is computer generated, this won't hold true for long, and I'm sure is already impossible to distinguish images produced cleanly enough.
I'm really out of ideas of what you can do about this. It sounds like a bad idea, a clearing house where images can be signed off as being legitimately computer generated would be workable solution. The clearing house would audit cartoon/animation and porn studios and determine that they are not, in fact, photographing children. Approved images would be given a verified digital signature. The clearing house would have to be impartial to the content of the images and only make their determinations based on the production of the image, as to the question of being produced by photographing a minor.
It would have to be clear that images lacking these signatures would NOT be automatically illegal, but that by having the signature the image could be immediately deduced as being approved by said clearing-house. Images not signed, and including potentially illicit content, would have to be individually reviewed and verified as must be done today.
The obvious danger of all of this is that corruption would hit the clearing house, that bribes would become the standard or, worse, that they succumb to political pressures to deny signatures for legal content. Further down the slippery slope would be the risk that it would become a legal requirement to be signed by this authority, or that there would be too much a stigma by not working within such a voluntary system.
Again, I think the best thing here would be for this to be a voluntary, non-governmental system, like as the rating systems are designed for video games and music...
Of course, if "The Long Tail" is wrong, then this independant film will more likely resemble "Howard The Duck".
Which coincidentally enough, just made it onto Hulu this week! I intend to watch it again, as I was strange enough to have loved this as a child. It was my favorite movie, in fact.
I found that Wine can take a while to start processes as well, although the most common reason for load-time complaints are due to problems caching the font metrics (and recaching every time wine is invoked)
On my Android phone, I search for websites with URLs that I know because it is faster & easier. I would never do this on a regular computer, where it would be silly, but for mobile devices I think it is a fine and even preferable thing.
This is a matter of supply and demand, equilibrium prices, etc. The economic theory is that if vendors and customers will naturally settle upon a price that is both mutually agreeable and in a way that maximizes profits at a price agreeable to the consumer. Customers that feel the prices are too high, or vendors that feel the prices are too low will have to either wait until prices meet their expectations or will leave the market. A case in point, on the consumer side is waiting another year before buying a new television because your reasonable expectation, based on trends, is that the price will decrease.
If this application developer isn't willing to supply at the current equilibrium price level, then they can charge more but will likely see a decrease in overall profits versus selling it for the equilibrium price at which they can move more units.
It's enough to burn a CD or DVD and offer to help with installation / usage. Make them dual boot. Show them an alternative and then let them make their own choice. That is freedom, that is choice. Which is far from the GNU/GPL is morally superior crap that just pisses me off. I personally prefer BSD that way.
If you read the article summary, you would have realized that this is more or less what the students were trying to do, and they got in trouble for it. What readers here are saying is that it was "evil" (as you call it) for the teacher to prevent the students from doing this, especially as the teacher is supposed to promote education and to be open-minded to new and different ideas (aka learning).
I wasn't specifically referring to the vendor OS, as much as I was the OS configuration. However, I have found that regardless of the configuration, Windows seems to have bigger problems with this out of the box (even with a clean installation). Yet, Linux certainly isn't immune, its customizable enough that it can be as bad as you want it to be.
"My OS is slow and broken, so thats why I think Chrome is better than Firefox."
Huh? I don't get it. While I can see why this is a good thing, how often are you rebooting your computer for this to really matter? Oh, and it shouldn't matter even then, because your OS shouldn't be so broken that this would even be a consideration!
When Slashdot was assigning 5-digit UIDs, the users weren't any less "retarded". They're just older now. A lot of the low-intelligence and immature users of those days simply aren't around anymore. You know, the Darwinian effect.
This reminds me of Voltaire's joke, "In this country it is a good thing to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." If the joke needs explaining, it is this: steps to deter treason (or increase loyalty) will often have the exact opposite effect. Of course, that is all fine and just as it is the best of all possible worlds, and for what do admirals exist but to be executed for their failures? Similarly, for what to travelers exist for other than to be poked and prodded, to become terrorists, and ultimately see that other travelers become poked and prodded? Leibnizian thinking at its finest?
It is easy to argue that even where there are more MacOS installation than Linux installations, that there might yet be a larger Linux gaming audience than a Mac gaming audience.
Personally, I know more people with Macs than use Linux on the desktop. Yet, I know more Linux users with systems capable of running Source-engine games (at acceptable framerates) than Mac users. This is because almost everyone I know that owns a Mac, owns a Macbook or Mac Mini, very few own Macbook Pro or Mac Pro systems. On the other hand, the Linux users can run on practically any hardware they wish, and have gaming-capable hardware.
Let the embarrassment of not having cash at the time begin! Really, I so rarely deal with cash anymore that I've been caught more than once going to a restaurant with friends, and realizing that I was the only one that didn't think to bring cash along. However, that *is* happening more rarely because all my friends have begun ditching cash as well, it is becoming rare that any of us have cash to pay the restaurant check.
The license is a contract, but not all aspects of contracts are enforceable. It is possible that the the provision indicating the requirement to run on "Apple labeled hardware" could be illegal or ruled unenforceable.
I should note that the OS X license does indicate that if any part of the contract is deemed unenforceable, that the contract otherwise stays in effect. Thus, if it was ruled that the phrase "Apple labeled hardware" was not legitimate, the rest of the license would still apply -- the user would be able to use the license on non-Apple hardware.
Well, true, except that they removed the setuid permissions on the copies of 'su' that we created on our phones. If they weren't actively trying to prevent root access, they would've just closed the vulnerability rather than removing root access from those that obtained it for themselves. I was naive enough to accept the update without reading about it first, and I lost root on my phone. However, I updated with the thought that I'd rather be stuck without root than a vulnerability as huge as that was.
Many systems have a replaceable BIOS chip. You can buy a new one, even flashed for you, for reasonable prices from several online sources.
Since we're talking about AMD here, when the original Barcelona came out, I was one of the first to get them. Since there weren't yet any motherboards that supported the chip without being flashed, I simply outsourced it and had a flashed BIOS chip mailed.
If having a popular linux distribution support a processor was all it took to migrate "the droves" off x86 processors, we'd all be running PowerPC processors a long time ago.
The telnetd hack was running as root without explanation, and was oddly non-functional from the adb shell. This could provide a reason for that -- the adb shell was running the telnetd process as the non-root user, while running telnetd from the phone itself (via pTerminal) was running as the non-root user AND as the root user (via this bug). The execution as a non-root user would fail, while the second launch as root would succeed and open a root shell on port 22.
Slashdot Mirror
You prefer that we let them starve instead? These are people that are willing to suffer from chemical poisoning because it is better than the alternative. I agree with them, it is better than the alternative -- starving.
If this is cheap enough, I can see it being somewhat useful as a desktop computer. I can even see such a keyboard/computer being useful for a portable gaming rig if it had a faster processor and a decent video adapter. However, they instead seem to be marketing it for the HTPC market in which area I expect it to be an utter flop. My HTPC is great because I can throw my keyboard, replace the batteries once a year, etc. This unit will have to be charged daily, handled very carefully (don't have kids!) and otherwise be a nuisance in the living room.
Finally, I can see this also being a neat, useful item if it was a standard keyboard with the screen controlled by the host computer via a USB video adapter. Again, something this won't do but would make it a great and marketable product.
There are some great ideas and use-cases here, but they're picking all the wrong ones!
For reference for those wondering what the parent means: Multiplier effect
The small guys do this too, to be honest. In my town, we have two small mom and pop coffee shops that are open for a few hours a day in the morning. They are not open when I'm looking for entertainment, and they don't provide internet (which if they did, I might go there earlier). In the biggest intersection in town, the corners consist of two gas stations, a park, and an empty lot (which is quite an eye-sore). Starbucks wanted to open there, but the small coffee shops lobbied to prevent the township from allowing the permits to build.
While generally, I would prefer having local businesses as opposed to mega-corporations like Starbucks, I cannot support local businesses that simply refuse to complete.
I once came across something similar where a small restaurant couldn't even sell brewed coffee because of a Starbucks in the shopping center! Likewise, Starbucks had a contract with the landlord...
My point isn't only that computer generated images will be realistic, which I understand is already the case to a certain degree, but the fact that real photographs may be "turned into" non-realistic images that are indistinguishable from drawn cartoons.
We're already at the point where it would make sense to begin auditing how these images are created, because visual verification is increasingly difficult or impossible -- in both directions. Likewise, it is not immediately obvious which images are of minors are which are not, not only to judges but to casual laypeople that might wander onto the wrong website. Only through auditing and accounting information, available and usable by laypeople, can people protect themselves from legal liability.
Of course, I'm assuming here, of course, that the majority of people agree with me that computer generated or hand-drawn drawn cartoons or computer images should not be considered as child pornography. This fact is, of course, what is very much on discussion here today, but I wonder how many people are looking to outlaw cartoon images simply because they cannot be distinguished from real images which have been doctored to look like cartoons, thus painting the law with broad strokes?
The underlying problem that is worrying many, I believe, is that as technology advances it will become increasingly difficult to distinguish between real photographs and cartoons. They're be indistinguishable. This goes in both directions, in making real images look like cartoons, and in making cartoons that look like real photographs. While there might still be ways to forensically determine if an image is computer generated, this won't hold true for long, and I'm sure is already impossible to distinguish images produced cleanly enough.
I'm really out of ideas of what you can do about this. It sounds like a bad idea, a clearing house where images can be signed off as being legitimately computer generated would be workable solution. The clearing house would audit cartoon/animation and porn studios and determine that they are not, in fact, photographing children. Approved images would be given a verified digital signature. The clearing house would have to be impartial to the content of the images and only make their determinations based on the production of the image, as to the question of being produced by photographing a minor.
It would have to be clear that images lacking these signatures would NOT be automatically illegal, but that by having the signature the image could be immediately deduced as being approved by said clearing-house. Images not signed, and including potentially illicit content, would have to be individually reviewed and verified as must be done today.
The obvious danger of all of this is that corruption would hit the clearing house, that bribes would become the standard or, worse, that they succumb to political pressures to deny signatures for legal content. Further down the slippery slope would be the risk that it would become a legal requirement to be signed by this authority, or that there would be too much a stigma by not working within such a voluntary system.
Again, I think the best thing here would be for this to be a voluntary, non-governmental system, like as the rating systems are designed for video games and music...
Which coincidentally enough, just made it onto Hulu this week! I intend to watch it again, as I was strange enough to have loved this as a child. It was my favorite movie, in fact.
Besides the nefarious reasons, there is the simple matter of cost -- transit in the US is cheaper.
I found that Wine can take a while to start processes as well, although the most common reason for load-time complaints are due to problems caching the font metrics (and recaching every time wine is invoked)
On my Android phone, I search for websites with URLs that I know because it is faster & easier. I would never do this on a regular computer, where it would be silly, but for mobile devices I think it is a fine and even preferable thing.
This is a matter of supply and demand, equilibrium prices, etc. The economic theory is that if vendors and customers will naturally settle upon a price that is both mutually agreeable and in a way that maximizes profits at a price agreeable to the consumer. Customers that feel the prices are too high, or vendors that feel the prices are too low will have to either wait until prices meet their expectations or will leave the market. A case in point, on the consumer side is waiting another year before buying a new television because your reasonable expectation, based on trends, is that the price will decrease.
If this application developer isn't willing to supply at the current equilibrium price level, then they can charge more but will likely see a decrease in overall profits versus selling it for the equilibrium price at which they can move more units.
If you read the article summary, you would have realized that this is more or less what the students were trying to do, and they got in trouble for it. What readers here are saying is that it was "evil" (as you call it) for the teacher to prevent the students from doing this, especially as the teacher is supposed to promote education and to be open-minded to new and different ideas (aka learning).
I wasn't specifically referring to the vendor OS, as much as I was the OS configuration. However, I have found that regardless of the configuration, Windows seems to have bigger problems with this out of the box (even with a clean installation). Yet, Linux certainly isn't immune, its customizable enough that it can be as bad as you want it to be.
"My OS is slow and broken, so thats why I think Chrome is better than Firefox."
Huh? I don't get it. While I can see why this is a good thing, how often are you rebooting your computer for this to really matter? Oh, and it shouldn't matter even then, because your OS shouldn't be so broken that this would even be a consideration!
When Slashdot was assigning 5-digit UIDs, the users weren't any less "retarded". They're just older now. A lot of the low-intelligence and immature users of those days simply aren't around anymore. You know, the Darwinian effect.
This reminds me of Voltaire's joke, "In this country it is a good thing to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others." If the joke needs explaining, it is this: steps to deter treason (or increase loyalty) will often have the exact opposite effect. Of course, that is all fine and just as it is the best of all possible worlds, and for what do admirals exist but to be executed for their failures? Similarly, for what to travelers exist for other than to be poked and prodded, to become terrorists, and ultimately see that other travelers become poked and prodded? Leibnizian thinking at its finest?
I should've posted anonymously.
It is easy to argue that even where there are more MacOS installation than Linux installations, that there might yet be a larger Linux gaming audience than a Mac gaming audience.
Personally, I know more people with Macs than use Linux on the desktop. Yet, I know more Linux users with systems capable of running Source-engine games (at acceptable framerates) than Mac users. This is because almost everyone I know that owns a Mac, owns a Macbook or Mac Mini, very few own Macbook Pro or Mac Pro systems. On the other hand, the Linux users can run on practically any hardware they wish, and have gaming-capable hardware.
Let the embarrassment of not having cash at the time begin! Really, I so rarely deal with cash anymore that I've been caught more than once going to a restaurant with friends, and realizing that I was the only one that didn't think to bring cash along. However, that *is* happening more rarely because all my friends have begun ditching cash as well, it is becoming rare that any of us have cash to pay the restaurant check.
The license is a contract, but not all aspects of contracts are enforceable. It is possible that the the provision indicating the requirement to run on "Apple labeled hardware" could be illegal or ruled unenforceable.
I should note that the OS X license does indicate that if any part of the contract is deemed unenforceable, that the contract otherwise stays in effect. Thus, if it was ruled that the phrase "Apple labeled hardware" was not legitimate, the rest of the license would still apply -- the user would be able to use the license on non-Apple hardware.
Well, true, except that they removed the setuid permissions on the copies of 'su' that we created on our phones. If they weren't actively trying to prevent root access, they would've just closed the vulnerability rather than removing root access from those that obtained it for themselves. I was naive enough to accept the update without reading about it first, and I lost root on my phone. However, I updated with the thought that I'd rather be stuck without root than a vulnerability as huge as that was.
Many systems have a replaceable BIOS chip. You can buy a new one, even flashed for you, for reasonable prices from several online sources.
Since we're talking about AMD here, when the original Barcelona came out, I was one of the first to get them. Since there weren't yet any motherboards that supported the chip without being flashed, I simply outsourced it and had a flashed BIOS chip mailed.
If having a popular linux distribution support a processor was all it took to migrate "the droves" off x86 processors, we'd all be running PowerPC processors a long time ago.
The telnetd hack was running as root without explanation, and was oddly non-functional from the adb shell. This could provide a reason for that -- the adb shell was running the telnetd process as the non-root user, while running telnetd from the phone itself (via pTerminal) was running as the non-root user AND as the root user (via this bug). The execution as a non-root user would fail, while the second launch as root would succeed and open a root shell on port 22.
Case solved?
The phone doesn't have passwd, or a traditional passwd database at all.