But you forgot the benefits package. First, you have to provide pizza for all the IT people at all hours, day or night. Second, you have to provide daily massages with happy endings for the CTO. Now does $30 per gigabyte-month make sense?:-)
What if the law change applies retroactively? Then the truth as of a given time changed. Yes, you could argue that it was illegal at the time at the time, but at some point, as with time travel, the qualifiers and tenses start to become awkward....:-)
Oh, and I also forgot to mention that those numbers are probably under ideal circumstances. Temperature, charge rate, etc. can have a big impact on the actual life expectancy. Constant trickle charging is probably the hardest thing you can do to a battery, so unless your charge system is smart enough to handle the "battery full" condition reasonably and dump excess power into a dummy load or whatever, you might get significantly less than 6k charge cycles.
That's only 16 years if your total output from panels is consistently greater than your demand even at peak load and you drain your batteries fully every night. If your demand wavers significantly, you might be drawing power off the batteries some of the time during the day, and thus could be using more than one charge cycle per day. If you don't discharge fully at night, you could be using fewer than one charge cycle per day. So that's a good estimate, but how good depends highly on the installation details.
...what they are doing right now doesn't make any sense.
And as an organization run by the members, I suspect Mr. Williams won't be speaking for ASCAP much longer. The backlash by ASCAP members has been significant.
ASCAP is going to become irrelevant as content producers such as authors move to distributing digitally exclusively so that they get more money from the purchase of their works.
Unlikely. This suggests that you don't fully understand what ASCAP does. ASCAP does the following:
Collects money from radio stations that broadcast your work. Until radio dies, this will continue.
Collects blanket license fees from performance venues that are distributed to folks whose works are performed. This is unlikely to ever stop being important. Those performance venues make money because of live music, little of which goes to the performers. As such, pushing the burden of licensing onto them means that composers don't get paid, pure and simple. No direct sales system for composers selling copies of sheet music/lead sheets is going to change that.
Collects money from sale of audio CDs and distributes it to its membership. This will likely diminish to nothing pretty soon if it hasn't already.
Note that none of those have anything to do with performers selling works to the general public. Artists obtaining mechanical licenses so that they can record someone else's works do so either on a one-off basis through a contract or by going through HFA/Songfile or similar. ASCAP has nothing to do with that process whatsoever (except occasionally being a source of information when trying to find out who wrote a particular work). Similarly, artists selling works to the public neither license anything from ASCAP nor are members of ASCAP unless they are also composers or publishers.
The truth exists independently of the positions we may take in an argument or the laws we might pass.
That's not entirely true. For example, I could say that it is illegal to smoke pot in the U.S. And that would be true until California takes a vote this November. Then, the truth will have changed; that statement is currently true, but no longer will be. Similarly, as this whole discussion is about copyright law, the law does, indeed, play a role, though it is unlikely that any change in the law would be sufficient to make ASCAP's statements in this matter even remotely true.
Either way, it's pretty clear that ASCAP's Paul Williams is either an idiot or a bald-faced liar, and no changes in copyright law will ever change that. Does anybody know if there's a mechanism for ASCAP members to make a motion of no confidence? I'd love to help start that process, but I'm not really familiar enough with ASCAP's governance to know where to begin.
Why is a virtual machine being run with a heap size limit by default anyway? I could understand having one for a VM when running server-side to prevent out-of-control processes from killing the server, but for a client installation? Sounds like the workaround breaking is merely symptomatic of a much bigger design flaw to me.
99% of buyers just want to steal games, nothing else. Yes, yes, dangerous precedent an' all that but in this case i agree with the courts!
That seems doubtful. If this truly is the easiest way to carry multiple games around without having to carry around physical copies of each one, then it seems likely that legitimate use is not only significant, but is probably in the majority.
And this, folks is one of the big reasons why iPhone and iPod Touch are tearing so badly into Nintendo's portable gaming sales. The more you tIghten your grip, Nintendo, the more users will slip through your fingers.
Given how much graffiti I see around here, I'd imagine that a sizable percentage of spray paint is used to commit vandalism. Yet I can still buy spray paint. Most cigarette papers in many places are used for pot, but those are still sold legally. Radar detectors are primarily used to evade prosecution for infractions, yet are legal in most of the U.S. And 100% of all VCRs and DVRs are used for copyright violations, which although exempted from prosecution by judicial rulings in the Betamax case, are still technically violations of the law, just (barely) protected violations. And so on. That argument doesn't hold water.
At least in the U.S., it has nothing to do with the percentage of people who use something for illegal activity and everything to do with a giant pro-copyright lobbying effort by major corporations that also happen to heavily fund the political campaigns of both major parties. I'd imagine that either the same is true in the U.K. or it's caused by the U.S. throwing its weight around. It's also probably safe to say that Nintendo shopped around for the right legislative district to file a suit in so that they would get the most bang for their buck.
It's not the first time Nintendo has been abusively anti-consumer rights, either. Remember Galoob v. Nintendo? They have a long history of abusing copyright to suit their ends. This is just another example.
To be fair, I think the GP was suggesting adding larger countdown timers specifically for drivers. If the numbers were three feet high instead of eight or ten inches, you'd be able to easily read them far enough back even on a 55 MPH road.
Alternatively, you could put a second light farther back that begins blinking ahead of the light changing, directing people farther back to start slowing down because they can't possibly make it. Or you could put a second countdown timer farther back. Either way.
True. The countdown timers generally only run the whole time in cities where the roads don't have functioning walk buttons (e.g. San Francisco) or when you are driving on the secondary street in cities where they do. It's important to be aware of where you are. A real countdown timer intended specifically for drivers would, of course, not have those problems, presumably.
Agreed about the signs. I love having those. I'd love it even more if there were a timer right in the center beside the stoplight with big numbers.
That said, I think you're wrong about drivers adjusting to the longer yellows. Humans don't estimate time very well beyond a few seconds unless they are actively counting. Thus, unless drivers got into the habit of ignoring the yellows entirely and slowing down on red, drivers adjusting isn't likely beyond about seven or eight seconds. And there have been studies that bear that theory out, IIRC, though I'm too lazy to search for them right now.
The other thing that significantly improves safety as far as light timing goes is having a second or two of "all ways red" before giving the green light to the other direction. The first thing I noticed about traffic lights when I came to California from Tennessee was that in California, there was often no delay at all before the cross direction turned green. No surprise that California had to implement the stupid red light cameras to cut down on the T-bone crashes, which in turn, increased the rate of rear end collisions. It's all completely predictable by anyone with the slightest bit of common sense, really.
There's one other really simple thing that cities can do: mark outer limit lines on the asphalt. After all, assuming cars are traveling at the speed limit, you can trivially calculate how far they can travel in the yellow time. Subtract the length of a typical vehicle, subtract the width of the intersection, measure that distance away from the intersection, and mark an obvious line (maybe we should standardize on a particular color so that it has meaning) that goes all the way across the street.
By doing this, drivers know that if they haven't reached that line when the light turns yellow, they need to stop, and only if they have passed that line do they need to judge stopping based on their speed. Admittedly, if you're traveling under or over the speed limit, an outer limit line is less useful, but it at least gives you a general ballpark. And it costs a lot less than electronic countdown timers.... Combine them with longer yellow lights and even a second of "all ways red", and things will improve significantly.
Such outer limit lines also have the convenient effect of being an affirmative defense if cities later decide to shorten yellow light timing to try to raise red light camera revenue (not to mention making it almost certain that they will get caught if they attempt to do so without first repaving the road). But I digress.
I wasn't arguing with your assertion, just bringing up the point that there's some subtlety here. That and trying to find a reasonable place to top post.:-)
This is not so much "My information shouldn't be free" but "stop using my works for profit when the license explicitly says for non-commercial use."
But is selling ads to pay bandwidth costs really a commercial use of the work? If I posted a copy of somebody's CC-licensed work on my blog and my blog provider puts ads up in exchange for letting me blog for free, how is that any different? In the end, I'm still getting consideration from those ads. Depending on the interpretation, one could reasonably argue that there's no such thing as non-commercial use for anyone but the extremely wealthy. I don't think that's a desirable outcome.
So is it strictly necessary for businesses to be audited and show that they are breaking even on that particular page on their website to qualify, or is it simply necessary for the website to break even? What about if some part of the site also sells products? Your content drew someone to the website, and later, they bought something on the connected store site. Does that store site have to be nonprofit? Arguing for such limitations is pretty much guaranteed to kill all use of CC-licensed works by businesses. It's way too easy to cross such vague lines, and nothing terrifies businesses more than unknown levels of risk.
My opinion? When evaluating whether something is commercial use or not, you should be asking yourself the following questions:
Is the work itself being directly sold for a profit?
Is the work being used as a logo or otherwise being used in some way to directly promote a good or service?
Does the website's use of the work lack any significant literary, artistic, or scholarly purpose?
If the answer to those questions is "no", it is probably not a true commercial use, and even if you sued, you probably would not win, and even if you did win, you probably should not win. If the answer to at least two of those questions is "yes", you have a strong case.
The reality of the matter is that when you get out into the field, employers don't care if you're not really interested in networking. You'd better have at least a basic understanding of it or you're in trouble. There's almost no software development at this point that doesn't at least use networking around the fringes unless you limit yourself to device driver programming, and even then, you'd have to avoid network device drivers. And does an I2C bus count as networking in your book? If so, you're completely screwed.:-)
The same could be said for nearly everything you'll learn in an undergraduate CS curriculum. I never thought I'd need compiler design principles, yet here I am maintaining a rather large parser. I never thought I'd be working with databases, but I find myself working with them almost daily. I never thought, as a Mac person, that I'd need to know i386 assembly. Get the picture? I'm actively using what I learned in every single class from my major on a nearly day-to-day basis. That's not at all unusual.
The fact of the matter is that the faculty who choose which classes to offer usually have a lot more insight into students' futures than the students do at the time. That's why there are stricter requirements for even the fringe classes in your major---to encourage students to take classes seriously that they would otherwise assume don't really apply to them. Making students well rounded in other areas is useful; making them well rounded in their majors is mandatory, and if they don't do better than non-majors would in their major classes, they probably aren't cut out for that major.
And I really don't buy the whole "IS majors won't ever need to program again" thing, either. The time when database admins could get away with not writing code is in the distant past. Outside of large shops, those jobs just aren't there anymore. People who only know how to build interfaces in Access really aren't qualified for a sizable percentage of jobs in the field. Sure, you might be able to do lots of contract jobs, but a full-time position usually requires more than that.
These days, they want you to come in, set up a database, and build both customer-facing and staff-facing web front ends for it, then integrate it with their in-store point-of-sale system, their online merchant account gateway, etc. In a couple of years, they'll be screaming because certain queries are taking hours and they'll want you to write custom query optimization code. And so on. The lines are rather rapidly blurring between CS and IS, and people who know only one side of the coin are going to be in a world of hurt as time progresses.
Besides, the point of college isn't to teach you information and skills. The information and skills you learn (at least in CS) will be useful for maybe five, maybe ten years after you graduate. At that point, you'd better have learned other stuff on the job. The point of college is to prepare you for the real world, which means taking on projects you're not really interested in, learning what you need to learn in order to complete those projects, and coming out the other side a more employable person for having done so. If you can't do that, you're just not cut out for a career in computing, and really, maybe for any career that doesn't involve asking if a customer wants fries with that.
1. Not all classes are of equal importance. Being more lenient for courses outside your major (Ds) encourages people to get a broader education by punishing students less for taking non-intro classes outside the major. When it comes to turning out students that are well rounded and prepared to succeed in the workplace, that's a good thing.
2. Failing people who aren't at average level just means that half your students will fail, assuming a Gaussian distribution. That seems a little extreme, particularly when you consider how many years it would add to the average length of a college education.
In most schools, a D satisfies a course requirement outside your major, but not a course requirement within your major. That makes a lot of sense, really, as it provides more leniency in classes that are less critical to your specific degree. The alternative would be grading major students on a different curve, but that blows up when people start exploiting it by changing majors at the last minute....
The thing is, for something so bizarrely unlikely, bare minimum standard for such extraordinary proof would be independent confirmation by a second party. So no single study could provide sufficient proof. We'd need two or three news organizations all having done such studies and all posting them. Sort of that second and third story, the first study should be doubted no matter what it says.
The issue is that any citizen should be allowed to tape public police actions and post them to the internet without being charged with a crime.
And to that end, the only way the public can fight this sort of extremism is for people in states that act like this to all videotape *everything* and post *every* clip of the cops on the web. Overwhelm the system with so many tens of thousands of these cases that they can't prosecute them all. Real social change only happens when the people are willing to face arrest to sit at the front of a bus. Civil disobedience and all that.
Yeah, but without finger grease clogging the sensors, without the ball falling out and hitting the floor and breaking when you turn it upside down, etc. And good lucky finding a Bluetooth trackball.
In fact, I couldn't even find a Bluetooth trackpad except for a weird combo keyboard/trackpad device that only works with Windows, a tiny micro-trackpad on the Interlink presenter remote, and a few full-size Bluetooth keyboards with built-in trackpads. This may be the first *usable* Bluetooth trackpad anybody has ever built, and since it was built by Apple, I can be pretty sure its Bluetooth implementation won't suck.
I've been looking for this sort of device for the last half decade. As soon as I've read reviews to make sure it works, I'll be ordering one.
Slashdot Mirror
But you forgot the benefits package. First, you have to provide pizza for all the IT people at all hours, day or night. Second, you have to provide daily massages with happy endings for the CTO. Now does $30 per gigabyte-month make sense? :-)
Fixed that for you.
What if the law change applies retroactively? Then the truth as of a given time changed. Yes, you could argue that it was illegal at the time at the time, but at some point, as with time travel, the qualifiers and tenses start to become awkward.... :-)
Oh, and I also forgot to mention that those numbers are probably under ideal circumstances. Temperature, charge rate, etc. can have a big impact on the actual life expectancy. Constant trickle charging is probably the hardest thing you can do to a battery, so unless your charge system is smart enough to handle the "battery full" condition reasonably and dump excess power into a dummy load or whatever, you might get significantly less than 6k charge cycles.
That's only 16 years if your total output from panels is consistently greater than your demand even at peak load and you drain your batteries fully every night. If your demand wavers significantly, you might be drawing power off the batteries some of the time during the day, and thus could be using more than one charge cycle per day. If you don't discharge fully at night, you could be using fewer than one charge cycle per day. So that's a good estimate, but how good depends highly on the installation details.
And as an organization run by the members, I suspect Mr. Williams won't be speaking for ASCAP much longer. The backlash by ASCAP members has been significant.
Of course, none of this would be an issue if Java didn't forgo proper memory management in favor of garbage collection. Just saying.
Unlikely. This suggests that you don't fully understand what ASCAP does. ASCAP does the following:
Note that none of those have anything to do with performers selling works to the general public. Artists obtaining mechanical licenses so that they can record someone else's works do so either on a one-off basis through a contract or by going through HFA/Songfile or similar. ASCAP has nothing to do with that process whatsoever (except occasionally being a source of information when trying to find out who wrote a particular work). Similarly, artists selling works to the public neither license anything from ASCAP nor are members of ASCAP unless they are also composers or publishers.
That's not entirely true. For example, I could say that it is illegal to smoke pot in the U.S. And that would be true until California takes a vote this November. Then, the truth will have changed; that statement is currently true, but no longer will be. Similarly, as this whole discussion is about copyright law, the law does, indeed, play a role, though it is unlikely that any change in the law would be sufficient to make ASCAP's statements in this matter even remotely true.
Either way, it's pretty clear that ASCAP's Paul Williams is either an idiot or a bald-faced liar, and no changes in copyright law will ever change that. Does anybody know if there's a mechanism for ASCAP members to make a motion of no confidence? I'd love to help start that process, but I'm not really familiar enough with ASCAP's governance to know where to begin.
Why is a virtual machine being run with a heap size limit by default anyway? I could understand having one for a VM when running server-side to prevent out-of-control processes from killing the server, but for a client installation? Sounds like the workaround breaking is merely symptomatic of a much bigger design flaw to me.
That seems doubtful. If this truly is the easiest way to carry multiple games around without having to carry around physical copies of each one, then it seems likely that legitimate use is not only significant, but is probably in the majority.
And this, folks is one of the big reasons why iPhone and iPod Touch are tearing so badly into Nintendo's portable gaming sales. The more you tIghten your grip, Nintendo, the more users will slip through your fingers.
Given how much graffiti I see around here, I'd imagine that a sizable percentage of spray paint is used to commit vandalism. Yet I can still buy spray paint. Most cigarette papers in many places are used for pot, but those are still sold legally. Radar detectors are primarily used to evade prosecution for infractions, yet are legal in most of the U.S. And 100% of all VCRs and DVRs are used for copyright violations, which although exempted from prosecution by judicial rulings in the Betamax case, are still technically violations of the law, just (barely) protected violations. And so on. That argument doesn't hold water.
At least in the U.S., it has nothing to do with the percentage of people who use something for illegal activity and everything to do with a giant pro-copyright lobbying effort by major corporations that also happen to heavily fund the political campaigns of both major parties. I'd imagine that either the same is true in the U.K. or it's caused by the U.S. throwing its weight around. It's also probably safe to say that Nintendo shopped around for the right legislative district to file a suit in so that they would get the most bang for their buck.
It's not the first time Nintendo has been abusively anti-consumer rights, either. Remember Galoob v. Nintendo? They have a long history of abusing copyright to suit their ends. This is just another example.
Ah, but the moderation is a meta-joke in and of itself.
To be fair, I think the GP was suggesting adding larger countdown timers specifically for drivers. If the numbers were three feet high instead of eight or ten inches, you'd be able to easily read them far enough back even on a 55 MPH road.
Alternatively, you could put a second light farther back that begins blinking ahead of the light changing, directing people farther back to start slowing down because they can't possibly make it. Or you could put a second countdown timer farther back. Either way.
True. The countdown timers generally only run the whole time in cities where the roads don't have functioning walk buttons (e.g. San Francisco) or when you are driving on the secondary street in cities where they do. It's important to be aware of where you are. A real countdown timer intended specifically for drivers would, of course, not have those problems, presumably.
Agreed about the signs. I love having those. I'd love it even more if there were a timer right in the center beside the stoplight with big numbers.
That said, I think you're wrong about drivers adjusting to the longer yellows. Humans don't estimate time very well beyond a few seconds unless they are actively counting. Thus, unless drivers got into the habit of ignoring the yellows entirely and slowing down on red, drivers adjusting isn't likely beyond about seven or eight seconds. And there have been studies that bear that theory out, IIRC, though I'm too lazy to search for them right now.
The other thing that significantly improves safety as far as light timing goes is having a second or two of "all ways red" before giving the green light to the other direction. The first thing I noticed about traffic lights when I came to California from Tennessee was that in California, there was often no delay at all before the cross direction turned green. No surprise that California had to implement the stupid red light cameras to cut down on the T-bone crashes, which in turn, increased the rate of rear end collisions. It's all completely predictable by anyone with the slightest bit of common sense, really.
There's one other really simple thing that cities can do: mark outer limit lines on the asphalt. After all, assuming cars are traveling at the speed limit, you can trivially calculate how far they can travel in the yellow time. Subtract the length of a typical vehicle, subtract the width of the intersection, measure that distance away from the intersection, and mark an obvious line (maybe we should standardize on a particular color so that it has meaning) that goes all the way across the street.
By doing this, drivers know that if they haven't reached that line when the light turns yellow, they need to stop, and only if they have passed that line do they need to judge stopping based on their speed. Admittedly, if you're traveling under or over the speed limit, an outer limit line is less useful, but it at least gives you a general ballpark. And it costs a lot less than electronic countdown timers.... Combine them with longer yellow lights and even a second of "all ways red", and things will improve significantly.
Such outer limit lines also have the convenient effect of being an affirmative defense if cities later decide to shorten yellow light timing to try to raise red light camera revenue (not to mention making it almost certain that they will get caught if they attempt to do so without first repaving the road). But I digress.
"Hey look kids, there's Big Ben, and there's Parliament. "
I wasn't arguing with your assertion, just bringing up the point that there's some subtlety here. That and trying to find a reasonable place to top post. :-)
But is selling ads to pay bandwidth costs really a commercial use of the work? If I posted a copy of somebody's CC-licensed work on my blog and my blog provider puts ads up in exchange for letting me blog for free, how is that any different? In the end, I'm still getting consideration from those ads. Depending on the interpretation, one could reasonably argue that there's no such thing as non-commercial use for anyone but the extremely wealthy. I don't think that's a desirable outcome.
So is it strictly necessary for businesses to be audited and show that they are breaking even on that particular page on their website to qualify, or is it simply necessary for the website to break even? What about if some part of the site also sells products? Your content drew someone to the website, and later, they bought something on the connected store site. Does that store site have to be nonprofit? Arguing for such limitations is pretty much guaranteed to kill all use of CC-licensed works by businesses. It's way too easy to cross such vague lines, and nothing terrifies businesses more than unknown levels of risk.
My opinion? When evaluating whether something is commercial use or not, you should be asking yourself the following questions:
If the answer to those questions is "no", it is probably not a true commercial use, and even if you sued, you probably would not win, and even if you did win, you probably should not win. If the answer to at least two of those questions is "yes", you have a strong case.
Caveat emptor: IANAL.
The reality of the matter is that when you get out into the field, employers don't care if you're not really interested in networking. You'd better have at least a basic understanding of it or you're in trouble. There's almost no software development at this point that doesn't at least use networking around the fringes unless you limit yourself to device driver programming, and even then, you'd have to avoid network device drivers. And does an I2C bus count as networking in your book? If so, you're completely screwed. :-)
The same could be said for nearly everything you'll learn in an undergraduate CS curriculum. I never thought I'd need compiler design principles, yet here I am maintaining a rather large parser. I never thought I'd be working with databases, but I find myself working with them almost daily. I never thought, as a Mac person, that I'd need to know i386 assembly. Get the picture? I'm actively using what I learned in every single class from my major on a nearly day-to-day basis. That's not at all unusual.
The fact of the matter is that the faculty who choose which classes to offer usually have a lot more insight into students' futures than the students do at the time. That's why there are stricter requirements for even the fringe classes in your major---to encourage students to take classes seriously that they would otherwise assume don't really apply to them. Making students well rounded in other areas is useful; making them well rounded in their majors is mandatory, and if they don't do better than non-majors would in their major classes, they probably aren't cut out for that major.
And I really don't buy the whole "IS majors won't ever need to program again" thing, either. The time when database admins could get away with not writing code is in the distant past. Outside of large shops, those jobs just aren't there anymore. People who only know how to build interfaces in Access really aren't qualified for a sizable percentage of jobs in the field. Sure, you might be able to do lots of contract jobs, but a full-time position usually requires more than that.
These days, they want you to come in, set up a database, and build both customer-facing and staff-facing web front ends for it, then integrate it with their in-store point-of-sale system, their online merchant account gateway, etc. In a couple of years, they'll be screaming because certain queries are taking hours and they'll want you to write custom query optimization code. And so on. The lines are rather rapidly blurring between CS and IS, and people who know only one side of the coin are going to be in a world of hurt as time progresses.
Besides, the point of college isn't to teach you information and skills. The information and skills you learn (at least in CS) will be useful for maybe five, maybe ten years after you graduate. At that point, you'd better have learned other stuff on the job. The point of college is to prepare you for the real world, which means taking on projects you're not really interested in, learning what you need to learn in order to complete those projects, and coming out the other side a more employable person for having done so. If you can't do that, you're just not cut out for a career in computing, and really, maybe for any career that doesn't involve asking if a customer wants fries with that.
Two reasons:
1. Not all classes are of equal importance. Being more lenient for courses outside your major (Ds) encourages people to get a broader education by punishing students less for taking non-intro classes outside the major. When it comes to turning out students that are well rounded and prepared to succeed in the workplace, that's a good thing.
2. Failing people who aren't at average level just means that half your students will fail, assuming a Gaussian distribution. That seems a little extreme, particularly when you consider how many years it would add to the average length of a college education.
In most schools, a D satisfies a course requirement outside your major, but not a course requirement within your major. That makes a lot of sense, really, as it provides more leniency in classes that are less critical to your specific degree. The alternative would be grading major students on a different curve, but that blows up when people start exploiting it by changing majors at the last minute....
The thing is, for something so bizarrely unlikely, bare minimum standard for such extraordinary proof would be independent confirmation by a second party. So no single study could provide sufficient proof. We'd need two or three news organizations all having done such studies and all posting them. Sort of that second and third story, the first study should be doubted no matter what it says.
And to that end, the only way the public can fight this sort of extremism is for people in states that act like this to all videotape *everything* and post *every* clip of the cops on the web. Overwhelm the system with so many tens of thousands of these cases that they can't prosecute them all. Real social change only happens when the people are willing to face arrest to sit at the front of a bus. Civil disobedience and all that.
Yeah, but without finger grease clogging the sensors, without the ball falling out and hitting the floor and breaking when you turn it upside down, etc. And good lucky finding a Bluetooth trackball.
In fact, I couldn't even find a Bluetooth trackpad except for a weird combo keyboard/trackpad device that only works with Windows, a tiny micro-trackpad on the Interlink presenter remote, and a few full-size Bluetooth keyboards with built-in trackpads. This may be the first *usable* Bluetooth trackpad anybody has ever built, and since it was built by Apple, I can be pretty sure its Bluetooth implementation won't suck.
I've been looking for this sort of device for the last half decade. As soon as I've read reviews to make sure it works, I'll be ordering one.