Exactly... the recent European Parliament elections used simple paper ballots, were roughtly the same scale as the US elections, and they were timely and scandal-free.
Cell phones already do mp3s, what's new that's new is the iTunes compatibility, which presumably means aac playback is the 'innovation' here.
My new Sony Ericsson K700i has 40mb of available ram (enough for 12 x 3 minute pop songs in marketingspeak), if they were not trying to rip me off for more than the phone cost for a usb-to-dumb-proprietary-connector cable I'd have an equivalent system here.
1. If bounces never incur a fee, then spammers will use that as a loophole, faking their target as the 'from', and mailing to a known bad address.
2. The beneift of spam recuction only happens when the system is in place. The problem is durnig the (long) time it would take the whole world to adopt the new system.
3. The new system fails if either the sender or recipient's escrow server is down or unreachable, or if any of the challenges and responses are lost. How can adding all these additional points of failure possibly make things MORE reliable?
4. You need to trust everyone you want to send a legitmate mail to... examples include ebay bidders, every customer of your business, that person who got someone else's address wrong and mistakenly mailed you something, the listserv that claims ro run a list that you might want to sign up to, etc. etc. Do you really want to worry that all of these might be ripping you off?
5.People not in the scheme either get told their mail is being ignored baceause it doesn't have a bond (which will annoy them), or they don't get told and their mail is binned (which will also annoy them), or it gets delievered anyway in which case the whole scheme is pointless.
6. Your point seems to bear to relation to mine. It's in spammers interests to kill off the new system. They will do whatever it takes to kill the escrow servers, in order to stop the scheme being adopted. This is nothing to do with the normal spam traffic over the old system.
7. It only takes one 51 cent fee to kill at 50 cent balance, Once it becomes known that people can make 51 cents (or any other number) from you by tricking you into sending them a mail, every scumbag in the world will be trying to scam you/hack the fee network/ask for $0.0000001 then change their rate to $10000 between you saying yes and them claiming from you.
8. If you can do this, you've solved the spam problem! There would be need for all this escrow stuff at all.
9. You are right... providing of course that the system is infallible, all ISPs in the world are competent and honest, there are no non-isp owned mailservers in the world, and everyone is honest, and no-one anywhere, no matter how dumb they are ever gets scammed. If these conditions are not met, the media will whip up a frenzy about the risks, killing it stone dead.
10. You'd better tell the maintainer of the FAQ that it's not needed then. The FAQ says "With email between individuals, reputation can be established over time, entirely within the context of the medium."
1) who pays for bounce messages ? 2) who pays for badnwidth needed for billions of bond requests? 3) adds a number of new points of faliure to already flaky e-mail system 4) relies on everyone knowing the 'reputation' of every possibility in the whole of the possible address-space 5) bombarding everyone outside the scheme with bond request messages will make this the most hated thing since spam itself 6) spammers will ddos the hell out of the infrastructure, giving it a reputation for flakyiness 7) 'exposure is limited to the amount in your escrow account' ie it cuts you off from mail every now & then unless you top it up - people are going to LOVE having to do that 8) Faked from fields 9) Introduces ability to 'escrow-ddos' a company by signing up random valid names to lists who then collect on unwanted mail. 10) 'reputation' system will quickly devolve into ebay feedback style AAAAAAAAAAA++++++++++++ garbage.
I could go on for another page or two. Their 'Extended FAQ' says 'yes but we don't care' to half the above btw.
It's got a wildcard in it so it's very hard to google for.
www.xdollarx.co.uk changes regularly (novels that don't exist one week, records that don;t exist the next, 1000 page websites that come and go)
www.xdollarx.com has gone.
Discussion on the xdollarx yahoo group became very odd very quickly, and then all messages were deleted.
The earliest sightings of X$X seem to date from about 1987. All I know for sure is that other parts of the X$X meme are 1) the fake name Michael K and 2) the fake Magazine "Kathedral" 3) "The Building" (a website? a book? a record?) 4) "Smash" (a book? a record? a slogan?)...but wtf is it trying to sell... if anything?
Even cheap DV camcorders are leaps and bounds ahead of the high-end analogue gear of 10-15 years ago, provided you don't go for the very bottom end of the price range, you won't get results that are unacceptably bad from any manufacturer.
If you want to have more flexibility in editing than simply cutting out the bits that you don't need, then shooting everything from at least 2 angles is essential. Wouldn't you rather watch a well editied exciting but slightly noisy/blurry film than a pin-sharp dull one? It's going to be much easier to get people excited by your work if you say "if only I had better gear" at the end than if you say "if only I had more footage".
Also, don't skimp on the accesories - you should NEVER be in a situation where you don't have enough spare fully charged batteries and enough tape to record on. Do your research here, you might well be horrified at the cost of spare batteries and chargers!
In an ER situtation, there must be hundreds of things lying around that unauthorised people MUST NOT mess with, or people die and other people get fired. Just define the terminal as one of those things.
Stick a dummy video camera pointing at the keyboard, and tell all the unauthorised staff they'll get fired if they are seen touching it.
If you need to identify who is making entries, give every doctor a dedicated function key, and refuse any entires that are not preceded by a fkey press.
That's an incentive to offer one or both of these as *options*. I'm asking where the incentive is to make one or both of these *compulsory*. Big difference!
It's a lot like the DVORAK keyboard. Even if it is faster, I already know the 3x4 layout, and the potential gain isn't worth the effort of retraining.
But it's worse than that, since Nokia have dozens of weird layouts, there is no guarantee that by the time I come to buy my NEXT phone they will be making anything at all that uses the same layout, let alone a phone with the combination of features/price that I'm interested in.
"Nokia has done a lot of research in to the keyboard layout of a phone"
N-gage. Enough said?
"they are all actually the same basic layout, which is optimized for use with one hand"
I suggest you go look at their phones.
5 buttons in a column on one side of the screen and 5 in another on the other side (the 7600) isn't the same as 6 toggle switches with 2 numbers each (the 3200) isn't the same as buttons in 3 groups of triangles (3650), isn't the same as the conventional layout but with the middle column too big (2600) isn't the same as just slapping the buttons about in a swoopy pattern (7610).
Apart from actually hiding some of the numbers on the back of the phone, they have done everything they possibly can to make dialling numbers on some of these phones difficult.
This depends on your definition of a row. I want straight, parallel lines of identical sized buttons.
Of the phones Nokia currently sell in the UK (where I live), the comparison shows only 4 phones that are conventional enough for me - one is the brick-sized 9220 Communicator (which doesn't fit in my pockets - trust me on this, my last phone was the similar-sized 9110i), two are spacialist TETRA phones and the other is the bottom of the range model. 3 of the 'coming soon' phones also look usable to me.
Try and understand the comments before jumping in and calling posters idiots.
If you'd been playing attention, you would know that Microsoft's deal with BMW was a huge PR disaster, after a software problem caused a minister in the Thai government to have to smash his way out of a BMW by breaking a window to avoid roasting alive.
How easy or difficult things are, or who made a deal with who years ago bears no relevance to the point I was making, which is that the proximity between Apple's positive announcement and Microsoft's negative one is amazing.
In the console market, I'm not convinced that it's worth very much at all. Selling into a market dominated by kids, with a product cycle of about 5 years, a large portion of console buyers are going to grow out of the market, and a large portion are first time buyers.
Actually, I can't think of any other industry where 'significant players' crash and burn on as regular a basis as the console market - Being a 'significant player' didn't help Atari or Sega, both of whom had at one time or other bigger shares of the market than the xbox does, and it didn't do them any good.
It's like having an article about 500 years of woodwind, string and brass instuments and not mentioning Mozart or Beethoven, ie totally sensible once you grasp the concept.
Slashdot Mirror
Rampant piracy.
Exactly... the recent European Parliament elections used simple paper ballots, were roughtly the same scale as the US elections, and they were timely and scandal-free.
Cell phones already do mp3s, what's new that's new is the iTunes compatibility, which presumably means aac playback is the 'innovation' here.
My new Sony Ericsson K700i has 40mb of available ram (enough for 12 x 3 minute pop songs in marketingspeak), if they were not trying to rip me off for more than the phone cost for a usb-to-dumb-proprietary-connector cable I'd have an equivalent system here.
point by point on your replies....
1. If bounces never incur a fee, then spammers will use that as a loophole, faking their target as the 'from', and mailing to a known bad address.
2. The beneift of spam recuction only happens when the system is in place. The problem is durnig the (long) time it would take the whole world to adopt the new system.
3. The new system fails if either the sender or recipient's escrow server is down or unreachable, or if any of the challenges and responses are lost. How can adding all these additional points of failure possibly make things MORE reliable?
4. You need to trust everyone you want to send a legitmate mail to... examples include ebay bidders, every customer of your business, that person who got someone else's address wrong and mistakenly mailed you something, the listserv that claims ro run a list that you might want to sign up to, etc. etc. Do you really want to worry that all of these might be ripping you off?
5.People not in the scheme either get told their mail is being ignored baceause it doesn't have a bond (which will annoy them), or they don't get told and their mail is binned (which will also annoy them), or it gets delievered anyway
in which case the whole scheme is pointless.
6. Your point seems to bear to relation to mine. It's in spammers interests to kill off the new system. They will do whatever it takes to kill the escrow servers, in order to stop the scheme being adopted. This is nothing to do with the normal spam traffic over the old system.
7. It only takes one 51 cent fee to kill at 50 cent balance, Once it becomes known that people can make 51 cents (or any other number) from you by tricking you into sending them a mail, every scumbag in the world will be trying to scam you/hack the fee network/ask for $0.0000001 then change their rate to $10000 between you saying yes and them claiming from you.
8. If you can do this, you've solved the spam problem! There would be need for all this escrow stuff at all.
9. You are right... providing of course that the system is infallible, all ISPs in the world are competent and honest, there are no non-isp owned mailservers in the world, and everyone is honest, and no-one anywhere, no matter how dumb they are ever gets scammed. If these conditions are not met, the media will whip up a frenzy about the risks, killing it stone dead.
10. You'd better tell the maintainer of the FAQ that it's not needed then. The FAQ says "With email between individuals, reputation can be established over time, entirely within the context of the medium."
Heres 10 off the top of my head...
1) who pays for bounce messages ?
2) who pays for badnwidth needed for billions of bond requests?
3) adds a number of new points of faliure to already flaky e-mail system
4) relies on everyone knowing the 'reputation' of every possibility in the whole of the possible address-space
5) bombarding everyone outside the scheme with bond request messages will make this the most hated thing since spam itself
6) spammers will ddos the hell out of the infrastructure, giving it a reputation for flakyiness
7) 'exposure is limited to the amount in your escrow account' ie it cuts you off from mail every now & then unless you top it up - people are going to LOVE having to do that
8) Faked from fields
9) Introduces ability to 'escrow-ddos' a company by signing up random valid names to lists who then collect on unwanted mail.
10) 'reputation' system will quickly devolve into ebay feedback style AAAAAAAAAAA++++++++++++ garbage.
I could go on for another page or two. Their 'Extended FAQ' says 'yes but we don't care' to half the above btw.
ok, if the ilovebees one is easy, try a hard one:
...but wtf is it trying to sell... if anything?
What the hell is X$X
It's got a wildcard in it so it's very hard to google for.
www.xdollarx.co.uk changes regularly (novels that don't exist one week, records that don;t exist the next, 1000 page websites that come and go)
www.xdollarx.com has gone.
Discussion on the xdollarx yahoo group became very odd very quickly, and then all messages were deleted.
The earliest sightings of X$X seem to date from about 1987. All I know for sure is that other parts of the X$X meme are
1) the fake name Michael K and
2) the fake Magazine "Kathedral"
3) "The Building" (a website? a book? a record?)
4) "Smash" (a book? a record? a slogan?)
"Are we moving to a society that fears anything that could potentially look like a bomb to an uneducated twit?"
Yes!
However, the important question is 'can bombs be made that look like these objects to an educated twit who runs the bomb detectors?'
"DRM might be required by law"
Over my dead body.
Actually, I think you'll find it's their huge pile of cash that's keeping them flush with cash.
As with all technologies: A killer app.
Even cheap DV camcorders are leaps and bounds ahead of the high-end analogue gear of 10-15 years ago, provided you don't go for the very bottom end of the price range, you won't get results that are unacceptably bad from any manufacturer.
If you want to have more flexibility in editing than simply cutting out the bits that you don't need, then shooting everything from at least 2 angles is essential. Wouldn't you rather watch a well editied exciting but slightly noisy/blurry film than a pin-sharp dull one? It's going to be much easier to get people excited by your work if you say "if only I had better gear" at the end than if you say "if only I had more footage".
Also, don't skimp on the accesories - you should NEVER be in a situation where you don't have enough spare fully charged batteries and enough tape to record on. Do your research here, you might well be horrified at the cost of spare batteries and chargers!
Why is authentication needed?
In an ER situtation, there must be hundreds of things lying around that unauthorised people MUST NOT mess with, or people die and other people get fired. Just define the terminal as one of those things.
Stick a dummy video camera pointing at the keyboard, and tell all the unauthorised staff they'll get fired if they are seen touching it.
If you need to identify who is making entries, give every doctor a dedicated function key, and refuse any entires that are not preceded by a fkey press.
That's an incentive to offer one or both of these as *options*. I'm asking where the incentive is to make one or both of these *compulsory*. Big difference!
What's the incentive for ebay (or anyone else) to do that?
You believed the RIAA?
It's a lot like the DVORAK keyboard. Even if it is faster, I already know the 3x4 layout, and the potential gain isn't worth the effort of retraining.
But it's worse than that, since Nokia have dozens of weird layouts, there is no guarantee that by the time I come to buy my NEXT phone they will be making anything at all that uses the same layout, let alone a phone with the combination of features/price that I'm interested in.
"Nokia has done a lot of research in to the keyboard layout of a phone"
N-gage. Enough said?
"they are all actually the same basic layout, which is optimized for use with one hand"
I suggest you go look at their phones.
5 buttons in a column on one side of the screen and 5 in another on the other side (the 7600) isn't the same as 6 toggle switches with 2 numbers each (the 3200) isn't the same as buttons in 3 groups of triangles (3650), isn't the same as the conventional layout but with the middle column too big (2600) isn't the same as just slapping the buttons about in a swoopy pattern (7610).
Apart from actually hiding some of the numbers on the back of the phone, they have done everything they possibly can to make dialling numbers on some of these phones difficult.
This depends on your definition of a row. I want straight, parallel lines of identical sized buttons.
Of the phones Nokia currently sell in the UK (where I live), the comparison shows only 4 phones that are conventional enough for me - one is the brick-sized 9220 Communicator (which doesn't fit in my pockets - trust me on this, my last phone was the similar-sized 9110i), two are spacialist TETRA phones and the other is the bottom of the range model. 3 of the 'coming soon' phones also look usable to me.
Take a look at the Nokia that actually has the features I want and tell me it's going to be intuitive to use!
Try and understand the comments before jumping in and calling posters idiots.
If you'd been playing attention, you would know that Microsoft's deal with BMW was a huge PR disaster, after a software problem caused a minister in the Thai government to have to smash his way out of a BMW by breaking a window to avoid roasting alive.
How easy or difficult things are, or who made a deal with who years ago bears no relevance to the point I was making, which is that the proximity between Apple's positive announcement and Microsoft's negative one is amazing.
The user interface of a pushbutton telephone is such a simple thing, yet almost every Nokia phone breaks the rules, or bends it so far it hurts.
4 rows of 3 numbers (plus # and *), equally sized. Is that really too much to ask for?
If Nokia could stick to this simple rule, I'd have bought another one. I now have a Sony Ericsson phone.
I can't believe they dared annouce this so soon after Apple's ipod your BMW link-up.
.... jokes....!
Apple went with a suave, sophisticated company with a reputation for engineering, quality, hi-tech but controversial design, and high prices.
Microsoft went for a monopolistic company with a reputation for bad electrics, bad security, and a history of dodgy dealings with their government.
Too.... many
You are thinking of "Hawking Radiation", which (as you might guess by the name) Prof. Hawking already knows about.
From TFA...
"Hawking radiation" contains no information about the matter inside the black hole and once the black hole evaporates, all information is lost.
But this conflicts with the laws of quantum physics, which say that such information can never be completely wiped out.
It's a solution to this paradox that Hawking will be talking about.
In the console market, I'm not convinced that it's worth very much at all. Selling into a market dominated by kids, with a product cycle of about 5 years, a large portion of console buyers are going to grow out of the market, and a large portion are first time buyers.
Actually, I can't think of any other industry where 'significant players' crash and burn on as regular a basis as the console market - Being a 'significant player' didn't help Atari or Sega, both of whom had at one time or other bigger shares of the market than the xbox does, and it didn't do them any good.
"buff" (used every other sentence in the article) is defined in the dictionary of MMPORG terms as
buff : (noun) Something that temporarily improves a skill or an attribute.
This article is about Instruments, not musicians.
It's like having an article about 500 years of woodwind, string and brass instuments and not mentioning Mozart or Beethoven, ie totally sensible once you grasp the concept.