Why not a client that like Groove or something that allows more than file sharing? File sharing can only go so far. Since you are in a university setting, you can setup servers to host things. But oh wait, if professors need to share things with the students let's say....they can always use web server. So why P2P again?
This is yet another twist to the many different kinds of software that tries to get users to actually PAY for the product (and who can blame them?). It used to be we have shareware - the pay-by-the-honor-system system. Then came the time-trial shareware, which expires after the trail period, then came the nag-ware, which pops up with windows reminding you to register your software, crippleware, which had features that were disabled or functionality limited, then came the adware, which allows you to use the software as long as you were willing to put up with seeing ads.
So now, if you combined these (in DivX's case, it's adware and crippleware - the free version has lower quality/less features), you get Distasteful-Free-Alternatives-Ware.
Of course, Open/Free software is ultimately better. I say they should combine more of these alternatives to really give us the choice! I think DivX should also add a full-featured (non-crippled) time-trial version, and a nag-ware version just to complete the whole set. Let US decide which one we want to be annoyed by before we finally give up and go to a free alternative or (gasp!) actually cough up the money and purchase the full version.
FYI, I purchased the pro version of DivX because quite frankly, I watch enough DivX5.05 video files for me to justify it. For me, it was good old shareware - the pay-by-the-honor-system system. Of course, I never considered the adware version even for a second.
If Dean Kamen were to keep up this line of naming and also keep up the pricing on the product he produced, Steve Jobs will have to buy him out one day just to have the whole collection of high-cost iThings(tm). To bad he didn't name the Segway something like iWalk/iRide/iRoll.
Why is Slashdot posting these news release stories that are summarized and submitted by Roland Piquepaille? And for that matter, where are these details on his web site that he purports to have? All I see are direct quotes and linked pictures. This is the second one I see now. Is this a trend? Is this how one can get stories posted here? I'll go and read news release sites like Eureka Alert and quote generously from it, add a couple of picture links, and submit it here.
But you can never say that violent video games have no effect or no influence whatsoever on the individuals that play them. Neither does, as your post seem to imply (though I know that's not what you meant), poor parenting breed violence.
Good parenting can minimize the violence, but poor parenting doesn't necessarily cause violence. Neither can you say with 100% certainty that violent games do not cause violent behavior - it depends on too many different factors - but violent games by themselves cannot be proven to definitely cause violent behavior.
(If that wasn't a muddle confusing mess, I don't know what is)
Re:Everything can be related to math.
on
Origami and Math
·
· Score: 1
Now that was not only not funny, it's just plain wrong and shows what a big idiot you are (or how few women you actually know).
The other poster's crack about lack of math in the president's budget proposal, on the other hand...
It's a lot easier,,,
on
Brain Privacy
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
to figure out what is going on in someone's head by looking at the things that the person does or say, the external manifestations of a person's thoughts. If you are concerned about your "brain privacy", just don't talk to people, post on Slashdot or a personal blog, don't write letters or emails, etc.
That would be a great idea! That way, each unit of electricity can be packetized and the packets can be counted by an IP aware electric meter, making it even easier to monitor and record usage! Of course, then malformed electricity IP packets would have to be "retried" and not counted, saving you tons of money in electricity costs.
There are shortcomings to XML, certainly. Having worked with it, I know that I've had someissues. But the benefits that it brings (the human readability, the structure, and the parsers that are available for it, etc.), makes it a good thing much more so than a bad thing.
Programming for XML is more work, but in the end, it forces you to be more structured and disciplined to work with it. You are always working with standard way of constructing data and messages, rather than having to reinvent a new wheel each time, or create your own format that is totally different from everyone else's. It's more work upfront, but for maintainability and as Tim Bray points out, longevity, you can't beat it. They don't called it the new ASCII for nothing (though not completely appropro). Just like there were text editors that can open and edit any plaintext ASCII files, so it is with XML files - if you have an XML editor/parser (and they are almost everywhere, including the humble text editors), you can view it and edit it.
It's like following coding standards - it's more pain and effort to do it and to do it right, but you will be thankful for it later, and it will be well worth the effort. Those who don't think it's worth the effort probably aren't building anything that is supposed to last for years to come.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030313. html
Though I have to say, neither one are originators of the idea - I've seen it plenty of times before, but this IBM guy is closer to the implementation of a system.
Poems rhyme and have a regular meter and that's what makes it easier for us to remember (songs with catchy, rhyming lyrics are the same). Haikus are not exactly easier to remember because they don't rhyme (although the fixed number of syllables help).
I could be wrong, but I think it might be better to use another kind of poetry for this?
1. Doesn't epinions.com suffice as a general ratings/review site with a major section on books?
2. I haven't found anything on the policy for collection, ownership, and usage restrictions of data that is gathered from this. I will be damned if I post information to be shared only to see it be used for commercially licensed purposes only like CDDB down the road. I need to know that the information submitted by "volunteers" will be freely accessible and usable by everyone else, or if not, have that policy stated clearly.
Before everyone goes to help any kind of "community" project like this, I think the legal stipulations need to be upfront and clear.
The other problem is, maintaining this kind of information is a large undertaking (at a scale where it can be useful, at any rate). It's a nice idea, but what will keep it running so that it will remain useful for a long time, so that we are not just wasting our time here?
If the sales are the same as last year, when they didn't have this problem, then I would say that next year, they should remove it considering the "small but vocal" group's objection to it. I mean, if it was supposed to cut down on piracy, and yet, the market share remains the same even with this flap, then it probably bothered the neither the consumers nor the pirates. So why bother?
I didn't overlook "who" because I know it would be ok too. "Which" and "whom" are incorrect. I would use "that" in the original context, therefore, I believe it to be correct. I think both "who" and "that" can be used. But then, IANAG.
Oh, I missed one....you will note also, "without giving up any of the compatibility with the PC world that you need." hmmm....Mac users need the PC world? oh wait, was it that they need the compatibility with the PC world? What's so great about the PC world after all that the Mac users need to have compatibility with it? Can't the Mac user's own world suffice?
Most people don't understand TCO. For many people, time is cheap. If you are a professional or a consultant, you charge for your time, your time is valuable. Again, we are talking about people who may not have too much money (usually correlated with lower education).
Let's look at a different population, a family who's possibly making a big investment spending $1000 on a cheap PC. It may be something that the parents have no idea about, and it's the kid that wants the PC. For the kid, what matters is getting the thing, whether it works well like the Mac is not as relevant. For a kid who's not working, time can seem to not very valuable. Tinkering around with the PC, customizing it, doing all sorts of things with it can be fun and educational. With the Mac, you can only be productive and get things done. If you are a professional who needs to get things done that the Mac can do, then a Mac is a great choice for you. But not everyone using a computer needs to be productive. Gamers are a big group of this category, and game choices are somewhat more limited on the Mac than on a PC.
So I think that (though I have no stats to back it up) it's pretty safe to say that more kids are PC users than Mac users. Well, no wonder the level of education of PC users are lower than those of Mac users.
On the contrary, when you absolutely can't afford to spend too much money on something, you will make a choice based on how much something costs because of need, not making a choice of luxury. It is not an "elitist" choice. So they "don't know any better", that doesn't mean they should be looked down upon. It is a matter of choice. If I buy a cheaper, more affordable car, am I being elitist because I really can't afford a better, more reliable, and safer car? Saving a few dollars can mean a lot for me in today's fast moving computer industry. Having a PC that is adequate for my needs is all that I can do, are you going to say that that is being elitist too?
Look at Apple's Why Switch? campaign. One of the funnier things I've seen in a while:
Why switch to a Mac?
You can do things on a Mac that PC users only dream about, and do them more easily, without giving up any of the compatibility with the PC world that you need.
Questions about switching How do I check email? Will my digital camera work? Can I get business or games software? Can I use my printer? What about using a Mac in my office network?
"You can do things on a Mac that PC users only dream about?" So if the PC user can't do it, then how can you, as a Mac user, "do them more easily?"
An what's with the questions on switching? If you can do things on a Mac that PC users can only dream about, then why are all the questions about things that PC users can already do on their PCs? Maybe these things that PC users can only dream about aren't so important?
I know it's not as simple as I've presented, but it still seems very funny to me.
Hey, you know what, just because of this kind of stuff, I'd rather stick with PCs than go with a Mac. Macs are overpriced. Those with money or think they have money, or don't have the money and still want to be an elitist snob are many of the people who buy Macs (ok, so I'm generalizing, but so is saying that Mac buyers are more educated. Correlation!=Causation - Just because statistically speaking, Mac users have better education, doesn't mean the more education you have, the more likely you are to buy a Mac)
I prefer to think that lower income families choose PCs because they are more affordable, and in the long-term, a better choice because more people in the world us PCs with Windows, and if they are betting their $1000 investment on a computer for their children, they'd choose one that more people use. Buying a Mac is more of a luxury for many people.
It's like buying a car. Would you rather buy a Mercedes/Lexus/name your luxury car, or would you rather buy a Honda/Hyudai/name your regular car? (Damn, I'm gonna catch hell for mentioning these makes like that). The answer is, of course, it depends on what you can afford. Of course we'd all like a better made, better looking, and possibly safer, but certainly more luxurious car, but can we afford it? How will we use it? Will we use it as a utility vehicle, doing all our errands, etc., or will we drive it around to show off?
So it is with the PC and Mac debate. If you want to show off, can afford it (I know, some models of the Macs are lower in price, but in general, PCs are more affordable), you can get a Mac. But for many, less educated people, the PC is a no-brainer.
Closed source can have fewer bugs (security bugs are merely a special kind of bug) if the company that does the development is discplined and puts the focus on the quality (i.e. minimizing the bugs) of the software. Because they are all in the same organization, and they all follow development standards and methodology and provide good QA testing. That is, if the market and marketing department and the bottom line allows them time to do things correctly, which often is not the case.
Open Source software often depends on a somewhat less uniform and disciplined (but can often independently more disciplined than their commercial counterparts). There is usually less formal organization. This is where it really depends on the quality of work of the people working on these projects.
Because Open Source projects are less sensitive to the market and the bottom line (in general, except for the projects undertaken by commercial entities), they are not as likely to have quality problems because of lack of time.
But to say that Open Source projects have less bugs because more eyes are looking at them is a pretty big assumption. Just because more eyes can look at something doesn't mean more eyes will. The bugs can stay in Open Source projects for years before someone finds a problem - in this case, I'd say it depends on how popular this project is and how attractive is it to people who will look at code and look for problems and can understand what to look for. If anything, in a short-cycled, less popular piece of software, a commercial software can have better quality than an open source one if the commercial developers are disciplined and dedicated. It is simply a matter of time.
The network in Lain was far more scientifically and technologically out there than the "unified IP network". Lain was about a secret experiment with a man-machine network that uses the ultra-low frequencies that match the human brainwaves to network people directed to the "wired" by sending out the waves through the air. The Navi network is not that different from what we got now either... it was just an excuse to slip in an anime reference....
Slashdot Mirror
Why not a client that like Groove or something that allows more than file sharing? File sharing can only go so far. Since you are in a university setting, you can setup servers to host things. But oh wait, if professors need to share things with the students let's say....they can always use web server. So why P2P again?
This is yet another twist to the many different kinds of software that tries to get users to actually PAY for the product (and who can blame them?).
It used to be we have shareware - the pay-by-the-honor-system system. Then came the time-trial shareware, which expires after the trail period, then came the nag-ware, which pops up with windows reminding you to register your software, crippleware, which had features that were disabled or functionality limited, then came the adware, which allows you to use the software as long as you were willing to put up with seeing ads.
So now, if you combined these (in DivX's case, it's adware and crippleware - the free version has lower quality/less features), you get Distasteful-Free-Alternatives-Ware.
Of course, Open/Free software is ultimately better. I say they should combine more of these alternatives to really give us the choice! I think DivX should also add a full-featured (non-crippled) time-trial version, and a nag-ware version just to complete the whole set. Let US decide which one we want to be annoyed by before we finally give up and go to a free alternative or (gasp!) actually cough up the money and purchase the full version.
FYI, I purchased the pro version of DivX because quite frankly, I watch enough DivX5.05 video files for me to justify it. For me, it was good old shareware - the pay-by-the-honor-system system. Of course, I never considered the adware version even for a second.
If Dean Kamen were to keep up this line of naming and also keep up the pricing on the product he produced, Steve Jobs will have to buy him out one day just to have the whole collection of high-cost iThings(tm). To bad he didn't name the Segway something like iWalk/iRide/iRoll.
Why is Slashdot posting these news release stories that are summarized and submitted by Roland Piquepaille? And for that matter, where are these details on his web site that he purports to have? All I see are direct quotes and linked pictures. This is the second one I see now. Is this a trend? Is this how one can get stories posted here? I'll go and read news release sites like Eureka Alert and quote generously from it, add a couple of picture links, and submit it here.
They have great energy density, but try finding one in AA battery size. In fact, try finding one in D size!
The smallest I've seen of these are the size of large bucket - maybe about 2 gallon size.
Can't exactly put that in a wireless mouse, now, can we? Not to mention the gyroscopic effects of the battery in portable applications.
But you can never say that violent video games have no effect or no influence whatsoever on the individuals that play them. Neither does, as your post seem to imply (though I know that's not what you meant), poor parenting breed violence.
Good parenting can minimize the violence, but poor parenting doesn't necessarily cause violence. Neither can you say with 100% certainty that violent games do not cause violent behavior - it depends on too many different factors - but violent games by themselves cannot be proven to definitely cause violent behavior.
(If that wasn't a muddle confusing mess, I don't know what is)
Now that was not only not funny, it's just plain wrong and shows what a big idiot you are (or how few women you actually know).
The other poster's crack about lack of math in the president's budget proposal, on the other hand...
to figure out what is going on in someone's head by looking at the things that the person does or say, the external manifestations of a person's thoughts. If you are concerned about your "brain privacy", just don't talk to people, post on Slashdot or a personal blog, don't write letters or emails, etc.
That would be a great idea! That way, each unit of electricity can be packetized and the packets can be counted by an IP aware electric meter, making it even easier to monitor and record usage!
Of course, then malformed electricity IP packets would have to be "retried" and not counted, saving you tons of money in electricity costs.
There are shortcomings to XML, certainly. Having worked with it, I know that I've had someissues. But the benefits that it brings (the human readability, the structure, and the parsers that are available for it, etc.), makes it a good thing much more so than a bad thing.
Programming for XML is more work, but in the end, it forces you to be more structured and disciplined to work with it. You are always working with standard way of constructing data and messages, rather than having to reinvent a new wheel each time, or create your own format that is totally different from everyone else's. It's more work upfront, but for maintainability and as Tim Bray points out, longevity, you can't beat it. They don't called it the new ASCII for nothing (though not completely appropro). Just like there were text editors that can open and edit any plaintext ASCII files, so it is with XML files - if you have an XML editor/parser (and they are almost everywhere, including the humble text editors), you can view it and edit it.
It's like following coding standards - it's more pain and effort to do it and to do it right, but you will be thankful for it later, and it will be well worth the effort. Those who don't think it's worth the effort probably aren't building anything that is supposed to last for years to come.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030313. html
Though I have to say, neither one are originators of the idea - I've seen it plenty of times before, but this IBM guy is closer to the implementation of a system.
Poems rhyme and have a regular meter and that's what makes it easier for us to remember (songs with catchy, rhyming lyrics are the same). Haikus are not exactly easier to remember because they don't rhyme (although the fixed number of syllables help).
I could be wrong, but I think it might be better to use another kind of poetry for this?
1. Doesn't epinions.com suffice as a general ratings/review site with a major section on books?
2. I haven't found anything on the policy for collection, ownership, and usage restrictions of data that is gathered from this. I will be damned if I post information to be shared only to see it be used for commercially licensed purposes only like CDDB down the road. I need to know that the information submitted by "volunteers" will be freely accessible and usable by everyone else, or if not, have that policy stated clearly.
Before everyone goes to help any kind of "community" project like this, I think the legal stipulations need to be upfront and clear.
The other problem is, maintaining this kind of information is a large undertaking (at a scale where it can be useful, at any rate). It's a nice idea, but what will keep it running so that it will remain useful for a long time, so that we are not just wasting our time here?
If the sales are the same as last year, when they didn't have this problem, then I would say that next year, they should remove it considering the "small but vocal" group's objection to it. I mean, if it was supposed to cut down on piracy, and yet, the market share remains the same even with this flap, then it probably bothered the neither the consumers nor the pirates. So why bother?
At least you got the [sic] right. [sic.] with the period is just plainly wrong, not to mention unnecessary.
I didn't overlook "who" because I know it would be ok too. "Which" and "whom" are incorrect. I would use "that" in the original context, therefore, I believe it to be correct. I think both "who" and "that" can be used. But then, IANAG.
the original "that" is correct. I don't know why the [sic] was necessary. "Which" would be incorrect. I think "whom" is wrong also.
Oh, I missed one....you will note also, "without giving up any of the compatibility with the PC world that you need." hmmm....Mac users need the PC world? oh wait, was it that they need the compatibility with the PC world? What's so great about the PC world after all that the Mac users need to have compatibility with it? Can't the Mac user's own world suffice?
Most people don't understand TCO. For many people, time is cheap. If you are a professional or a consultant, you charge for your time, your time is valuable. Again, we are talking about people who may not have too much money (usually correlated with lower education).
Let's look at a different population, a family who's possibly making a big investment spending $1000 on a cheap PC. It may be something that the parents have no idea about, and it's the kid that wants the PC. For the kid, what matters is getting the thing, whether it works well like the Mac is not as relevant. For a kid who's not working, time can seem to not very valuable. Tinkering around with the PC, customizing it, doing all sorts of things with it can be fun and educational. With the Mac, you can only be productive and get things done. If you are a professional who needs to get things done that the Mac can do, then a Mac is a great choice for you. But not everyone using a computer needs to be productive. Gamers are a big group of this category, and game choices are somewhat more limited on the Mac than on a PC.
So I think that (though I have no stats to back it up) it's pretty safe to say that more kids are PC users than Mac users. Well, no wonder the level of education of PC users are lower than those of Mac users.
On the contrary, when you absolutely can't afford to spend too much money on something, you will make a choice based on how much something costs because of need, not making a choice of luxury. It is not an "elitist" choice. So they "don't know any better", that doesn't mean they should be looked down upon. It is a matter of choice. If I buy a cheaper, more affordable car, am I being elitist because I really can't afford a better, more reliable, and safer car? Saving a few dollars can mean a lot for me in today's fast moving computer industry. Having a PC that is adequate for my needs is all that I can do, are you going to say that that is being elitist too?
So stupid people don't deserve to use computers, huh? People who choose to use PCs are automatically less educated and less intelligent?
That line of reasoning is precisely why Mac users can be so conceited.
An what's with the questions on switching? If you can do things on a Mac that PC users can only dream about, then why are all the questions about things that PC users can already do on their PCs? Maybe these things that PC users can only dream about aren't so important?
I know it's not as simple as I've presented, but it still seems very funny to me.
Hey, you know what, just because of this kind of stuff, I'd rather stick with PCs than go with a Mac. Macs are overpriced. Those with money or think they have money, or don't have the money and still want to be an elitist snob are many of the people who buy Macs (ok, so I'm generalizing, but so is saying that Mac buyers are more educated. Correlation!=Causation - Just because statistically speaking, Mac users have better education, doesn't mean the more education you have, the more likely you are to buy a Mac)
I prefer to think that lower income families choose PCs because they are more affordable, and in the long-term, a better choice because more people in the world us PCs with Windows, and if they are betting their $1000 investment on a computer for their children, they'd choose one that more people use. Buying a Mac is more of a luxury for many people.
It's like buying a car. Would you rather buy a Mercedes/Lexus/name your luxury car, or would you rather buy a Honda/Hyudai/name your regular car? (Damn, I'm gonna catch hell for mentioning these makes like that). The answer is, of course, it depends on what you can afford. Of course we'd all like a better made, better looking, and possibly safer, but certainly more luxurious car, but can we afford it? How will we use it? Will we use it as a utility vehicle, doing all our errands, etc., or will we drive it around to show off?
So it is with the PC and Mac debate. If you want to show off, can afford it (I know, some models of the Macs are lower in price, but in general, PCs are more affordable), you can get a Mac. But for many, less educated people, the PC is a no-brainer.
Oh, also take a look at this
Closed source can have fewer bugs (security bugs are merely a special kind of bug) if the company that does the development is discplined and puts the focus on the quality (i.e. minimizing the bugs) of the software. Because they are all in the same organization, and they all follow development standards and methodology and provide good QA testing. That is, if the market and marketing department and the bottom line allows them time to do things correctly, which often is not the case.
Open Source software often depends on a somewhat less uniform and disciplined (but can often independently more disciplined than their commercial counterparts). There is usually less formal organization. This is where it really depends on the quality of work of the people working on these projects.
Because Open Source projects are less sensitive to the market and the bottom line (in general, except for the projects undertaken by commercial entities), they are not as likely to have quality problems because of lack of time.
But to say that Open Source projects have less bugs because more eyes are looking at them is a pretty big assumption. Just because more eyes can look at something doesn't mean more eyes will. The bugs can stay in Open Source projects for years before someone finds a problem - in this case, I'd say it depends on how popular this project is and how attractive is it to people who will look at code and look for problems and can understand what to look for.
If anything, in a short-cycled, less popular piece of software, a commercial software can have better quality than an open source one if the commercial developers are disciplined and dedicated. It is simply a matter of time.
The network in Lain was far more scientifically and technologically out there than the "unified IP network". Lain was about a secret experiment with a man-machine network that uses the ultra-low frequencies that match the human brainwaves to network people directed to the "wired" by sending out the waves through the air. The Navi network is not that different from what we got now either...
it was just an excuse to slip in an anime reference....