One of the few movies I like Keanu in (Matrix), he doesn't say a lot. One of his biggest lines is "Whoa!" And that's a Good Thing.
Neo can get away with that, but Superman is suppose to give patriotic speeches and such, which would require Keanu to talk, which is bad. I don't have any evidence for this, but I bet as the number of words Reeves says in a movie increases, the quality of the movie decreases.
Why do we need ANOTHER superman anyway? Four wasn't enough? 3 Indiana Jones' wasn't enough? 2 Home Alone's was pushing it. Why so many sequals. Oh, that's because the movie industry is just reusing old ideas to make big bucks instead of making quality films with new stories in new directions. Maybe something with a little social commentary here or there.
you run linux on a macintosh? Or if you dual boot between linux or MacOS, or even if you run Mac-on-linux? Is the author comparing PPC vs Linux on x86 or what?
It really doesn't matter who's winning the desktop market. They're both (hopefully) beginning to carve out a section out of Window's dominance. When the sum approaches 20%, then good stuff is going to start to happen... then again, I'm assuming linux and mac users numbers continue to grow (I guess no necessarially simultaniously).
Linux takin market share from windows is good; Macintosh taking marketshare from windows is good. Both situations leads to more competition, more developers, better software, etc.
I just wonder - how is the market share of Mac users now compared to a year or two ago. Same for linux. How many people have stayed, how many have switched from windows, how many have switched from mac/linux, how many have switched from *nix. That data would be pretty interesting.
Also (and I should have read the article), does the account for what's happening globally? I don't think Apple has much of a chance gaining marketshare in countries where price is of up most importance.
F-bacher
I can think of some other replaceables...
on
Motorola's i95cl
·
· Score: 2
Such as, we can replace walking with driving, so why ever walk? Oh wait, there's tons of places where walking is probably a better idea than driving a car. It's been said many times, and its very true: You use the tool that fits the situation. Sure, I could use a screw driver to hit in a nail, but it would be easier to do with a hammer.
Java has all the great things you've mentioned, but it has the draw back of a lot of overhead. It's not a cut and dry decisions - you have to weigh the costs and the benefits in every situation. Java has its place, but give me C or give me death!
Here's why: name the last time some one came up to you and asked "Tell me the quadratic formula and use it to solve this quadratic equation. You've got 1 minute... GO!" Honestly, this example is absurd, but some tests come down to that. What you can write down in a mad dash is not the same as if you're working on a problem in a "real world" setting.
Tests in general are after regurgitation and quick thinking, not knowledge of a subject. CS tests, on the other hand, seem to always be about analyzing a problem and coming up with a successful algorithm. In my opinion, CS tests are by far the BEST of all tests given. Any computer can store data, but it takes a thoughtful human to come up with an efficient algorithm to use that data.
I honestly like CS tests that emphasize breaking down a problem into small steps and coming up with solutions in english (or portuguese, whatever). Then, another portion of the test would be implementing small portions of that solution algorithm.
Ah well, I'm almost done with school anyway, what do I care.
Okay, forget karma or what not for a second. Honestly, why is this on slashdot? I'm not sure I approve of reporting minor earthquakes in San Francisco when I know hundreds of people die every day or so in huge catastrophes across the world. I'm an American, but I'm a little sick of this American-centric view of what's important. Either all minor disasters get reported, or none of them.
I can run 20 mi/hr, but only in small bursts. Heck, my fastest mile is just under 5 minute pace, or 12 mi/hr. But I can't keep that up for ten minutes, nor do I want to put myself through such a workout just to get to class. A bike would be a reasonable alternative, though. Then again, this could be great for people with leg disabilities (although "It" may need some adjustments to accomidate those with weaker legs).
Your college needs bigger sidewalks. Ours are huge (not to mention 6 feet deep so you can drive cars on them). But I definetly see how this could become a problem - it's bad enough for walkers, bikers, and cars to get along; now we're going to have conflicts between four main types of transportation.
I personally wish it could enclose your whole body. Then I'd feel like a tank, although I'd be missing the live ammunitions.
I think you miss my point. My argument isn't that we should sit around and do nothing, but that there needs to be a way to change the system of education a whole. The problem is, that is easiest in a more centralized for of education (like in Japan) than under our more decentralized model.
It's pretty much a fact that the US educational system is awful when compared to most other systems int the world. We have some of the brightest, but we have far too many of the lowest as well.
I am not a pessimist, not do I think teaching sucks (or will suck for me in the future). I understand that I don't understand how hard it will be out there for me. But I also understand that the system could be better. I think evidence from failed reform movements (thinking that passing out standards in books will change the system within which teachers and students operate) helps show what has been used in the past probably won't work in the future. So I ask you: what do you think should be done? I'm all ears.
I am a capitalist. I like the idea of competition, working for what you own, etc. But this type of stuff is what is inevitably going to be the result as long as most of the world is capitalist. On an individual level, most people will agree that something is a little wrong with this. But from a business standpoint, how could you not start taking advantage of this? Most people will be clueless about what's going on, and the potential for cost-effective advertising is huge (I remember the stat from one of my speech com classes: referals from friends are by far the best way to advertise i.e. word of mouth). And if you don't jump aboard, you're probably going to be put at a strategic disadvantage. Therefore, it almost becomes a capitalist imperative that you join in on a somewhat less noble cause. I'm sure most Hollywood directors (not the REALLy big ones) will tell you that they're not doing the work they'd really want to do. They're doing the work that sells, not the work that is deep, meaningful, socially relevant, etc.
It sucks, but it's what competition drives us towards.
Sweet, a fellow debater. I agree that some teachers I have had have broken that mold as well, but I don't know how long lasting their effects will be on the larger system of teaching. We're social beings, and the way we understand teaching is how we ourselves were taught. That means, if we were taught within the system (for the most part), it's highly likely that we will teach inside that system as well. In the event that we do have some teachers that break the mold, it's possible that our inspiration will be co-opted by the system. Even though I understand how my teachers were different, I literally have to teach my entire philophy of teaching before I can implement any of those differences. If I do a shoddy job of changing my assumptions, then I could end up teaching a lot of lessons don't work. One huge reason for that is that students are use to being taught under one system, so if I change up on them, they can easily be confused.
I'm not saying that change on an individual level isn't possible, just that's it's REALLY difficult to propogate effective change because the system is full of feedback loops that reinforce other parts of the system.
I agree in more ways than I want to admit. And I'm going to be a teacher next year! I've come to the conclusion that schools are set in place not to educate, but to make you proftable. It's not about learning, it's about money. How many times have I heard my professor say, "If only we had more time..." Why don't we get into the really important stuff? Because there isn't enough hours in the day to meet all the requirements that make me look like a good job applicant and see why math or computer science is really cool on another level.
My philosophy: School is a hoop that I must jump through so that one day my students will not have to jump through so many. Never let schooling stand in the way of your education, or so Samuel Clemons says. My latest (guided) revelation is that I am part of a system that is ineffective at preparing students, and all we get are books about standards and attempts to change the system instead of deconstructing problems within the system. True change comes by recognizing the flawed assumptions that are inherent in the system, allowing us to come to a new and more authentic view of how education should work. But individual change is futile; all educators and all education must change as a whole or not at all. The task is difficult; are any of us up to the challenge?
Heaven forbid that people help each other. I pray to God this mentality doesn't exist in any schools I teach at. The teacher knows all and students are simply bins to be filled with info. RIGHT, that's a good pedagogy. The most effective learning takes place when students take authoriship of the learning process. We'll just assume that the lecture format is okay for the moment. Are you really suggesting that students shouldn't learn from each other? I'd love to see how far science would be right now if everyone just stuck their heads in the sand and ignored everyone else besides their mentor or teacher.
You wonder why people have trouble grasping concepts? It's because they try to memorize them as procedures and not as real world results that can be derived if you look close enough. A complete teach-knows-all model helps create that line of thinking.
Every CS course I've been in has ENCOURAGED group work. It's not like humans are social creatures who learn best in social situations. I'm glad I didn't go there... or all my friends would be screwed;)
Considering they support Virtual PC (the ability to run Windows on a PPC via emulation) and mklinux (for a time), I doubt they would care. Heck, apple would probably sell all their machines with ProDos on them if it sold more hardware. Risking -1 redundant: apple is a hardware company. You can do whatever you want software wise as long as you buy the hardware.
I was reading another slashdot story (I think the one about gpl violations), and I saw a business add in the middle of the post! I was like, "WTF"? I was really scared for the future of slashdot... but after reloading and checking some other stories, the add was gone. So, am I hallucinating, or is someone playing with the slashcode and, more importantly, is this something we'll actually see in the future (please say no... please say no...)
Preparing to lose karma for a noble cause... F-bacher
Okay, so there's a 1 in 1000 chance that global waming may happen, and then's there some chance that it's bad (there's good evidence that it could be good as well). So it's a try or maybe have some bad stuff... that may kill us all, but we're all guessing. But there's a pretty good chance that making any systematic changes that would stop the "impending doom" would take years to implement in an economically sound way. The more draconian approaches would definetly hurt economic growth and industries, as many renewable technologies are still being refined. And we all know that global economic down turn can be bad (hint: look at WWII, but add some nuxes).
Oh, and guess what. The environmental lobbies and scientists have financial interests too. They get paid for studying stuff that matters. If there's no problem, they get no funding. Remember the Ozone-hole threat back in '92? NASA blew that one way out of proportion. It actually shrank! But they did get some good money to do research.
I'm not saying scientists are evil capitalists; many of them are good people with good intentions, but the only way they get funding is by making a threat out of a situation that may not be a threat at all.
There's multiply reasons why global warming could be great
#1. It's keeping us out of an ice age. I believe the historical record indicates that we're past due for the next ice age.
#2. Back in mideval times, it was much warmer. In fact, there was actually green plants on greenland! That's where it originally got the name. Has anyone know how hot it is in the Jungle? If it's so hot, why is there so much biodiversity? See next point.
#3. Increased heat leads to increased percipitation and more rain. That's why jungles have so much life - it's the rain. Increased circulation of rain could help increase vegitation (think crops too)
#4. Reglaciation. You know how warming is suppose to melt the ice caps? Well, if there's more rain, it's postulated that there will be more percipitation over the ice caps. Hence, more glaciation, to combat the minimal loss due to heat increase (which makes a small difference when it is already so cold)
#5. Most warming is at night. This is great for crops, as it protects against early frosts.
There are lots of other reasons why it's goo, these are just some of them.
These cities are what are called Urban Height Islands. Because of the black tar on roads and other hat absorbing characteristics of cities, cities retain more heat, and so are hotter.
Measurements of increased average heat temperatre in cities should take into account that changing the structure of the city can change the temperature measurements... although they may not always do so.
Initial sacrifice of karma: Yah? That's not very emphatic. Do you mean yay! That would indicate rejoycing over a good thing.
Anyway, this is definetly a good thing for movies because... er... actually, I'm not sure what else can be fit on there. Perhaps more "control your own fate" type things like in those GI Joe books I read a long time ago.
Games could definetly take advantage of this (FF games could get really huge, and no 3 disc sets, although they sometimes give you nice indicators of how far you are in the game).
Maybe we'll start to see the games combined with the movies? Like you buy Gold Finger and it comes with 007 on it already? It seems like a logical leep - you get people to buy two products at once.
How much are these babies anyway? I didn't see any price tags, but I'm assuming they'd be quite a chunk of change righ now.
That's always been the government's logic too. You remember the devices terorists used to take over those three planes? They were box cutters. Would baggage handlers have stoped them for those? No. It wasn't there fault for being lazy or underpaid or underqualified, there wasn't anything against having box cutters. That's one of those items that could end up in your bag by accident. But now a lot of people in government are screaming about federalizing bagage handlers; there's no connection.
The military always needs more funding for their little toys, so the best way to get funding is to tell the government that they need money to thwart a threat, even if the weapon doesn't counter the threat. Usually this type of funding is masked under the rhetoric of "military readiness" and "military effectiveness."
I'm no PVR expert, but I believe they know when commercials come on so you can skip right over them - on VCR's u eithere have to hit stop and record a lot or fastforward through the commercials, a lot more effort than just skipping them all together.
This is the price we pay for "free" tv. If you don't want ads, you're going to have to pay for it, because no network CEO is thinking, "let's make shows for free!" They have a bottom line, and ad space is how they meet it. I guess product placement inside of shows is going to become more of the norm to counteract PVRs, so more Trunman Show-esque plugs, which could be a good thing if they're done with some regard to the show that is being aired, IMHO.
EULA:...by purchasing this vehicle, you agree to never criticize our product openly...
Implication: no safety reviews. So if I go out to buy a car, I can't find out how dangerous it might be because the EULA has prevented constructive criticism from being presented to the public. Let me see, this would be bad.
The solution is, of course, not to buy from such a company. Unfortunately, most people don't begin to read EULA's; they're like the fine print at the bottom of car commercials - almost no one ever reads them, nor do I think many humans have the physical ability to read small dark print on dark surfaces in small amounts of time.
This also sort of reminds me of the Dilbert commic where by opening his software, he becoms Bill Gates' towel boy... and the house comes for him. He'd get his lawyer to help, but the lawyer opened the EULA first.
My take: if the contract signee doesn't understand the implications of the contract, they shouldn't be held liable. That would have to be determined in court, but boy would that be good news for Native Americans; if it could be retroative, think of all the land they could win back.
Why would apple be there? They are using a varient of *BSD, not a distribution of Linux to build and model Darwin off of, and they are contributing back to the BSD community with code, not the Linux community (at least, not directly). I'm not sure what they would do there. Maybe if it was Unix World, then it would make a lot of sense. Otherwise, apple should save the cash and come up with a good marketing strategy, they need one!
Slashdot Mirror
One of the few movies I like Keanu in (Matrix), he doesn't say a lot. One of his biggest lines is "Whoa!" And that's a Good Thing.
Neo can get away with that, but Superman is suppose to give patriotic speeches and such, which would require Keanu to talk, which is bad. I don't have any evidence for this, but I bet as the number of words Reeves says in a movie increases, the quality of the movie decreases.
Why do we need ANOTHER superman anyway? Four wasn't enough? 3 Indiana Jones' wasn't enough? 2 Home Alone's was pushing it. Why so many sequals. Oh, that's because the movie industry is just reusing old ideas to make big bucks instead of making quality films with new stories in new directions. Maybe something with a little social commentary here or there.
Matt Fahrenbacher
you run linux on a macintosh? Or if you dual boot between linux or MacOS, or even if you run Mac-on-linux? Is the author comparing PPC vs Linux on x86 or what?
It really doesn't matter who's winning the desktop market. They're both (hopefully) beginning to carve out a section out of Window's dominance. When the sum approaches 20%, then good stuff is going to start to happen... then again, I'm assuming linux and mac users numbers continue to grow (I guess no necessarially simultaniously).
Linux takin market share from windows is good; Macintosh taking marketshare from windows is good. Both situations leads to more competition, more developers, better software, etc.
I just wonder - how is the market share of Mac users now compared to a year or two ago. Same for linux. How many people have stayed, how many have switched from windows, how many have switched from mac/linux, how many have switched from *nix. That data would be pretty interesting.
Also (and I should have read the article), does the account for what's happening globally? I don't think Apple has much of a chance gaining marketshare in countries where price is of up most importance.
F-bacher
Such as, we can replace walking with driving, so why ever walk? Oh wait, there's tons of places where walking is probably a better idea than driving a car. It's been said many times, and its very true: You use the tool that fits the situation. Sure, I could use a screw driver to hit in a nail, but it would be easier to do with a hammer.
Java has all the great things you've mentioned, but it has the draw back of a lot of overhead. It's not a cut and dry decisions - you have to weigh the costs and the benefits in every situation. Java has its place, but give me C or give me death!
for a 500Mhz iBook? Yeah, I doubt it. I don't think it could possibly fit. Oh well, I just wish there was someway to add a G4 to my iBook.
Wishfully thinking,
F-bacher
Here's why: name the last time some one came up to you and asked "Tell me the quadratic formula and use it to solve this quadratic equation. You've got 1 minute... GO!" Honestly, this example is absurd, but some tests come down to that. What you can write down in a mad dash is not the same as if you're working on a problem in a "real world" setting.
Tests in general are after regurgitation and quick thinking, not knowledge of a subject. CS tests, on the other hand, seem to always be about analyzing a problem and coming up with a successful algorithm. In my opinion, CS tests are by far the BEST of all tests given. Any computer can store data, but it takes a thoughtful human to come up with an efficient algorithm to use that data.
I honestly like CS tests that emphasize breaking down a problem into small steps and coming up with solutions in english (or portuguese, whatever). Then, another portion of the test would be implementing small portions of that solution algorithm.
Ah well, I'm almost done with school anyway, what do I care.
F-bacher
Okay, forget karma or what not for a second. Honestly, why is this on slashdot? I'm not sure I approve of reporting minor earthquakes in San Francisco when I know hundreds of people die every day or so in huge catastrophes across the world. I'm an American, but I'm a little sick of this American-centric view of what's important. Either all minor disasters get reported, or none of them.
F-bacher
I can run 20 mi/hr, but only in small bursts. Heck, my fastest mile is just under 5 minute pace, or 12 mi/hr. But I can't keep that up for ten minutes, nor do I want to put myself through such a workout just to get to class. A bike would be a reasonable alternative, though. Then again, this could be great for people with leg disabilities (although "It" may need some adjustments to accomidate those with weaker legs).
F-bacher
Your college needs bigger sidewalks. Ours are huge (not to mention 6 feet deep so you can drive cars on them). But I definetly see how this could become a problem - it's bad enough for walkers, bikers, and cars to get along; now we're going to have conflicts between four main types of transportation.
I personally wish it could enclose your whole body. Then I'd feel like a tank, although I'd be missing the live ammunitions.
F-bacher
I think you miss my point. My argument isn't that we should sit around and do nothing, but that there needs to be a way to change the system of education a whole. The problem is, that is easiest in a more centralized for of education (like in Japan) than under our more decentralized model.
It's pretty much a fact that the US educational system is awful when compared to most other systems int the world. We have some of the brightest, but we have far too many of the lowest as well.
I am not a pessimist, not do I think teaching sucks (or will suck for me in the future). I understand that I don't understand how hard it will be out there for me. But I also understand that the system could be better. I think evidence from failed reform movements (thinking that passing out standards in books will change the system within which teachers and students operate) helps show what has been used in the past probably won't work in the future. So I ask you: what do you think should be done? I'm all ears.
F-bacher
I am a capitalist. I like the idea of competition, working for what you own, etc. But this type of stuff is what is inevitably going to be the result as long as most of the world is capitalist. On an individual level, most people will agree that something is a little wrong with this. But from a business standpoint, how could you not start taking advantage of this? Most people will be clueless about what's going on, and the potential for cost-effective advertising is huge (I remember the stat from one of my speech com classes: referals from friends are by far the best way to advertise i.e. word of mouth). And if you don't jump aboard, you're probably going to be put at a strategic disadvantage. Therefore, it almost becomes a capitalist imperative that you join in on a somewhat less noble cause. I'm sure most Hollywood directors (not the REALLy big ones) will tell you that they're not doing the work they'd really want to do. They're doing the work that sells, not the work that is deep, meaningful, socially relevant, etc.
It sucks, but it's what competition drives us towards.
F-bacher
Sweet, a fellow debater. I agree that some teachers I have had have broken that mold as well, but I don't know how long lasting their effects will be on the larger system of teaching. We're social beings, and the way we understand teaching is how we ourselves were taught. That means, if we were taught within the system (for the most part), it's highly likely that we will teach inside that system as well. In the event that we do have some teachers that break the mold, it's possible that our inspiration will be co-opted by the system. Even though I understand how my teachers were different, I literally have to teach my entire philophy of teaching before I can implement any of those differences. If I do a shoddy job of changing my assumptions, then I could end up teaching a lot of lessons don't work. One huge reason for that is that students are use to being taught under one system, so if I change up on them, they can easily be confused.
I'm not saying that change on an individual level isn't possible, just that's it's REALLY difficult to propogate effective change because the system is full of feedback loops that reinforce other parts of the system.
F-bacher
I agree in more ways than I want to admit. And I'm going to be a teacher next year! I've come to the conclusion that schools are set in place not to educate, but to make you proftable. It's not about learning, it's about money. How many times have I heard my professor say, "If only we had more time..." Why don't we get into the really important stuff? Because there isn't enough hours in the day to meet all the requirements that make me look like a good job applicant and see why math or computer science is really cool on another level.
My philosophy: School is a hoop that I must jump through so that one day my students will not have to jump through so many. Never let schooling stand in the way of your education, or so Samuel Clemons says. My latest (guided) revelation is that I am part of a system that is ineffective at preparing students, and all we get are books about standards and attempts to change the system instead of deconstructing problems within the system. True change comes by recognizing the flawed assumptions that are inherent in the system, allowing us to come to a new and more authentic view of how education should work. But individual change is futile; all educators and all education must change as a whole or not at all. The task is difficult; are any of us up to the challenge?
F-bacher
Heaven forbid that people help each other. I pray to God this mentality doesn't exist in any schools I teach at. The teacher knows all and students are simply bins to be filled with info. RIGHT, that's a good pedagogy. The most effective learning takes place when students take authoriship of the learning process. We'll just assume that the lecture format is okay for the moment. Are you really suggesting that students shouldn't learn from each other? I'd love to see how far science would be right now if everyone just stuck their heads in the sand and ignored everyone else besides their mentor or teacher.
You wonder why people have trouble grasping concepts? It's because they try to memorize them as procedures and not as real world results that can be derived if you look close enough. A complete teach-knows-all model helps create that line of thinking.
Sigh...
F-bacher
Every CS course I've been in has ENCOURAGED group work. It's not like humans are social creatures who learn best in social situations. I'm glad I didn't go there... or all my friends would be screwed ;)
F-bacher
Considering they support Virtual PC (the ability to run Windows on a PPC via emulation) and mklinux (for a time), I doubt they would care. Heck, apple would probably sell all their machines with ProDos on them if it sold more hardware. Risking -1 redundant: apple is a hardware company. You can do whatever you want software wise as long as you buy the hardware.
F-bacher
I was reading another slashdot story (I think the one about gpl violations), and I saw a business add in the middle of the post! I was like, "WTF"? I was really scared for the future of slashdot... but after reloading and checking some other stories, the add was gone. So, am I hallucinating, or is someone playing with the slashcode and, more importantly, is this something we'll actually see in the future (please say no... please say no...)
Preparing to lose karma for a noble cause...
F-bacher
Okay, so there's a 1 in 1000 chance that global waming may happen, and then's there some chance that it's bad (there's good evidence that it could be good as well). So it's a try or maybe have some bad stuff... that may kill us all, but we're all guessing. But there's a pretty good chance that making any systematic changes that would stop the "impending doom" would take years to implement in an economically sound way. The more draconian approaches would definetly hurt economic growth and industries, as many renewable technologies are still being refined. And we all know that global economic down turn can be bad (hint: look at WWII, but add some nuxes).
Oh, and guess what. The environmental lobbies and scientists have financial interests too. They get paid for studying stuff that matters. If there's no problem, they get no funding. Remember the Ozone-hole threat back in '92? NASA blew that one way out of proportion. It actually shrank! But they did get some good money to do research.
I'm not saying scientists are evil capitalists; many of them are good people with good intentions, but the only way they get funding is by making a threat out of a situation that may not be a threat at all.
F-bacher
There's multiply reasons why global warming could be great
#1. It's keeping us out of an ice age. I believe the historical record indicates that we're past due for the next ice age.
#2. Back in mideval times, it was much warmer. In fact, there was actually green plants on greenland! That's where it originally got the name. Has anyone know how hot it is in the Jungle? If it's so hot, why is there so much biodiversity? See next point.
#3. Increased heat leads to increased percipitation and more rain. That's why jungles have so much life - it's the rain. Increased circulation of rain could help increase vegitation (think crops too)
#4. Reglaciation. You know how warming is suppose to melt the ice caps? Well, if there's more rain, it's postulated that there will be more percipitation over the ice caps. Hence, more glaciation, to combat the minimal loss due to heat increase (which makes a small difference when it is already so cold)
#5. Most warming is at night. This is great for crops, as it protects against early frosts.
There are lots of other reasons why it's goo, these are just some of them.
F-bacher
These cities are what are called Urban Height Islands. Because of the black tar on roads and other hat absorbing characteristics of cities, cities retain more heat, and so are hotter.
Measurements of increased average heat temperatre in cities should take into account that changing the structure of the city can change the temperature measurements... although they may not always do so.
F-bacher
Initial sacrifice of karma: Yah? That's not very emphatic. Do you mean yay! That would indicate rejoycing over a good thing.
Anyway, this is definetly a good thing for movies because... er... actually, I'm not sure what else can be fit on there. Perhaps more "control your own fate" type things like in those GI Joe books I read a long time ago.
Games could definetly take advantage of this (FF games could get really huge, and no 3 disc sets, although they sometimes give you nice indicators of how far you are in the game).
Maybe we'll start to see the games combined with the movies? Like you buy Gold Finger and it comes with 007 on it already? It seems like a logical leep - you get people to buy two products at once.
How much are these babies anyway? I didn't see any price tags, but I'm assuming they'd be quite a chunk of change righ now.
</rambling>
F-bacher
That's always been the government's logic too. You remember the devices terorists used to take over those three planes? They were box cutters. Would baggage handlers have stoped them for those? No. It wasn't there fault for being lazy or underpaid or underqualified, there wasn't anything against having box cutters. That's one of those items that could end up in your bag by accident. But now a lot of people in government are screaming about federalizing bagage handlers; there's no connection.
The military always needs more funding for their little toys, so the best way to get funding is to tell the government that they need money to thwart a threat, even if the weapon doesn't counter the threat. Usually this type of funding is masked under the rhetoric of "military readiness" and "military effectiveness."
F-bacher
I'm no PVR expert, but I believe they know when commercials come on so you can skip right over them - on VCR's u eithere have to hit stop and record a lot or fastforward through the commercials, a lot more effort than just skipping them all together.
This is the price we pay for "free" tv. If you don't want ads, you're going to have to pay for it, because no network CEO is thinking, "let's make shows for free!" They have a bottom line, and ad space is how they meet it. I guess product placement inside of shows is going to become more of the norm to counteract PVRs, so more Trunman Show-esque plugs, which could be a good thing if they're done with some regard to the show that is being aired, IMHO.
F-bacher
EULA: ...by purchasing this vehicle, you agree to never criticize our product openly...
Implication: no safety reviews. So if I go out to buy a car, I can't find out how dangerous it might be because the EULA has prevented constructive criticism from being presented to the public. Let me see, this would be bad.
The solution is, of course, not to buy from such a company. Unfortunately, most people don't begin to read EULA's; they're like the fine print at the bottom of car commercials - almost no one ever reads them, nor do I think many humans have the physical ability to read small dark print on dark surfaces in small amounts of time.
This also sort of reminds me of the Dilbert commic where by opening his software, he becoms Bill Gates' towel boy... and the house comes for him. He'd get his lawyer to help, but the lawyer opened the EULA first.
My take: if the contract signee doesn't understand the implications of the contract, they shouldn't be held liable. That would have to be determined in court, but boy would that be good news for Native Americans; if it could be retroative, think of all the land they could win back.
Enough mindless babling.
F-bacher
Why would apple be there? They are using a varient of *BSD, not a distribution of Linux to build and model Darwin off of, and they are contributing back to the BSD community with code, not the Linux community (at least, not directly). I'm not sure what they would do there. Maybe if it was Unix World, then it would make a lot of sense. Otherwise, apple should save the cash and come up with a good marketing strategy, they need one!
F-bacher
Well, at least what it should be:
;)
Indiana Jones and the Comfortable Bed
Conan O'Brien was the first to mention it, but with Ford getting old, people are going to have to start bringing the treasures to him!
F-bacher