Users of Blippy want people to know about what they are buying... one more step towards having your entire life open to the world.
This brings up a point that needs to be looked in to a bit further as our personal information becomes digitized: at what point do you just let go of trying to hide personal numbers (such as credit card and social security) and make them as public as possible and force the system to make sure that YOUR numbers are really your numbers? Honestly, if the banking systems that we use for credit transactions notified me EVERY TIME that my SS# went through their systems , then I would know when it is being used and wouldn't worry so much about someone "stealing" my identity. It's a 9 digit number that will NEVER be reissued as long as I live; credit card numbers are 16 digits long and are 'throw-away'. As soon as the systems are in place that link me directly to my SS, I won't be worrying about trying to hide these numbers.
I'll be worrying about Big Brother watching my every move...
I think part of the reason why tablets have failed in the past is because the developers haven't made tablets more 'data appropriate'. They make the tablets in such a way as to display/use data in laptop form. That is, the nearly full ability to manage information (cut, paste, copy, image manipulation, database queries, etc.), but in a form factor that should be attached to a laptop, not a tablet.
The smartphones of today are displaying 'data appropriate' information in a form factor designed for a ~3" screen; that is why they succeed. Typing out a thesis on an iPhone isn't 'data appropriate', but viewing a PDF of a thesis is more 'data appropriate' for the smartphone form factor. I'm hoping Apple will develop a UI that will allow the tablet to be displaying/manipulating data appropriate for its size.
Why? Seriously, I would like to know. What would you use it for? A very large music player? A web browser that has no keyboard and likely is only useable in your house where you (presumably) have a desktop/laptop. Movies might be a good idea for it... I really don't know what this is supposed to be used for.
Based on what Apple has been able to do with the iPhone, I think that you have limited yourself to what you THINK it can only be. What is the iPhone? Is it JUST a phone? Is it a phone with an iPod built in? No... it's a platform on which creative developers have changed a piece of hardware with phone/data functionality into a gaming device, mapping device, social networking device, news/information gathering device, radio streaming device, etc. YOU may only limit it to what you can come up with; Apple will outsource the creative development to the software engineers of the world and this product has the potential of doing many, many things, just like they have done with the iPhone.
Just go watch a movie. It's in "demo" mode, all the time.
The production values of many video games rivals many movies in terms of cinematics, storyline, and musical score. The Final Fantasy series of video games are great, but the 40+ hours one spends in experiencing the game can't be easily shared with others. If a demo mode was set into the game in which the story was allowed to play out, I believe more people would be pulled into wanting to get that game.
The lines are starting to blur between game and movie...
That's exactly what I thought about this when I saw this: Google Maps or Google Earth. It is probably also something similar to technology used in video games that keeps progressively updating the details of an object that is far away that steadily comes closer and closer and adds detail.
And here is where a problem comes into play. Mainstream media writes a story. Blogs, friends, social networks, and family pick up on the story, and the story moves forward and propagates. What happens if mainstream media goes away? I don't see my dad suddenly becoming a roving reporter who broadcasts his news to everyone. There has to be a balance between the social aspect of moving news forward and the gathering of the news in a legitimate and professional manner.
It seems to me that the ruling was based on the variety of audio entertainment available to the consumer. It didn't focus on the specific industry of satellite radio; it centered on the fact that satellite radio is competing with land-based radio, CDs, podcasts, web streaming, HD radio, etc. With the perception that satellite radio is one of many versions of audio entertainment, this ruling makes sense to me.
But the acid rain problem went away because people dealt with it because of the bitching of environmentalists. And it didn't destroy industries or even coal powered electricity, like the other side claimed it would. I agree with you on this. It is the extreme viewpoint that grabs the attention, but also turns me off to anything that the extremist may have to say and it is the moderate that I have a tendency to listen to a bit more.
I guess as I get older, I tend to be more middle of the road when it comes to my viewpoints and I need the problems presented to me but I also need the possible solutions presented at the same time. Otherwise, I tend to think that people are just bitching if they only present problems all the time, and I'll just shut down and quit listening.
You bring up a good point and I will make it a goal of mine to remember that the term "environmentalist" covers a broad range of individuals, each with a broad range of opinion and formal and hands on experience.
That said, it is much more difficult to make broad sweeping comments about a broad group of people without the frakking author letting us know who the "environmental group" is that made the comment... I can only make comments on "environmentalists" and be as broad as the author of the original article.
I agree with you on this, but we're also getting mixed messages from various environmental groups (some more liberal than others) that all have a different take on how we're supposed to "save the planet". We have groups that told us that nuclear energy was going to kill off all the people on the earth 20 years ago, and now nuclear energy is a viable alternative to certain other types of energy sources. We had an "acid rain scare" that was going to wipe out all life on earth if we didn't change our ways of producing energy that never came around to ever happening. The extreme view of all of the environmentalists basically tells us to go back to the stone age and live in caves, and cook your meat that you hunted over a fire. Oh wait... put out that fire because it's emitting carbon back into the atmosphere and you're NOT supposed to eat meat because it is bad for you and the environment and you probably just killed off an indigenous species by eating it... However, a moderate view is to accept that small steps to reduce energy consumption is probably the best way to go, as Itchyeyes points out.
"Costing" should be reworded as "opportunity cost". Opportunity costs are counted in business because they are looked at as legitimate markers and goals that a business can look towards when deciding actions in markets and setting budgets.
If you are to believe what Piper Jaffray has to say, then AT&T Wireless is sending ~$9/month to Apple on a two year contract after giving $150 for the initial sale. That's $9*24 months*1.4 million non registered subscribers*3 years= ONE BEEEELION DOLLARS (Thank you Dr. Evil).
By going the route that is suggested, the glass is half full and you're satisfied with what you've got. If you see this as a glass-half-empty scenario and realize that you're losing a billion dollars, you're going to do your best with your shareholders' invested money and figure out how to get a chunk of that back into the pockets of your investors.
That's business folks...
Wasn't the whole iPhone scare done by an 11 year old? http://blog.psmxy.org/2008/01/05/warning-malicious-repo/
If it was, then I don't quite understand the "fear is hackers may be experimenting and gathering research that will increase the dangers of a more malicious attack in the near future" thought process if this whole thing was started by an 11 year old. Are there now roving gangs of pre-pubescent crackers out there that are going after my iPhone and to take over the world?!?!
I was outraged when I first saw this on Headline News this morning, but my outrage soon turned to disgust, which gave way to mild amusement when I started seeing the story, from literally different angles, on FOX News and CNBC. The guy was an ass, and you can see that the audience didn't want to deal with him anymore and were clapping as the police led him away. This post puts the actions and consequenses together plainly and concisely. HE escalated the consequences for his actions 4 times. Time #4 was cause for use of a taser. No guns were pulled, no bullets were fired because he didn't show an action that needed those consequenses.
Great post!
The thing is this: the internet is a communication device. TV is a communication device. The phone is a communication device. Why is it that it is SUDDENLY very important to make sure kids are safe online? What gives online safety priority over telephone safety? What gives online safety priority over ANY OTHER TYPE of safety? What are you going to teach next? How NOT to text and drive when the child turns 16? How NOT to grow up and be obese and have a heart attack when 45?
Honestly, the schools are having a tough enough time trying to cram kids' heads with facts and and trying to teach them how to think for themselves; let's leave some of society's responsibilities in the parent's hands. It is mentioned that it takes a village to raise a child. I say "every village needs its idiot, maybe it's your child..."; I also say "the village needs everyone to have a set of responsibilities that are assigned to them to teach the child what they need to know." I don't need the village garbageman teaching the village kid about STDs and how to prevent them; I'll leave that up to Village Mom and Dad and the village doctor... Just as teachers should have a responsibility to teach certain things to the kids, parents have a certian responsibility to teach their kids things too...
Slashdot Mirror
This brings up a point that needs to be looked in to a bit further as our personal information becomes digitized: at what point do you just let go of trying to hide personal numbers (such as credit card and social security) and make them as public as possible and force the system to make sure that YOUR numbers are really your numbers? Honestly, if the banking systems that we use for credit transactions notified me EVERY TIME that my SS# went through their systems , then I would know when it is being used and wouldn't worry so much about someone "stealing" my identity. It's a 9 digit number that will NEVER be reissued as long as I live; credit card numbers are 16 digits long and are 'throw-away'. As soon as the systems are in place that link me directly to my SS, I won't be worrying about trying to hide these numbers.
I'll be worrying about Big Brother watching my every move...
I think part of the reason why tablets have failed in the past is because the developers haven't made tablets more 'data appropriate'. They make the tablets in such a way as to display/use data in laptop form. That is, the nearly full ability to manage information (cut, paste, copy, image manipulation, database queries, etc.), but in a form factor that should be attached to a laptop, not a tablet.
The smartphones of today are displaying 'data appropriate' information in a form factor designed for a ~3" screen; that is why they succeed. Typing out a thesis on an iPhone isn't 'data appropriate', but viewing a PDF of a thesis is more 'data appropriate' for the smartphone form factor. I'm hoping Apple will develop a UI that will allow the tablet to be displaying/manipulating data appropriate for its size.
Why? Seriously, I would like to know. What would you use it for? A very large music player? A web browser that has no keyboard and likely is only useable in your house where you (presumably) have a desktop/laptop. Movies might be a good idea for it... I really don't know what this is supposed to be used for.
Based on what Apple has been able to do with the iPhone, I think that you have limited yourself to what you THINK it can only be. What is the iPhone? Is it JUST a phone? Is it a phone with an iPod built in? No... it's a platform on which creative developers have changed a piece of hardware with phone/data functionality into a gaming device, mapping device, social networking device, news/information gathering device, radio streaming device, etc. YOU may only limit it to what you can come up with; Apple will outsource the creative development to the software engineers of the world and this product has the potential of doing many, many things, just like they have done with the iPhone.
Just go watch a movie. It's in "demo" mode, all the time.
The production values of many video games rivals many movies in terms of cinematics, storyline, and musical score. The Final Fantasy series of video games are great, but the 40+ hours one spends in experiencing the game can't be easily shared with others. If a demo mode was set into the game in which the story was allowed to play out, I believe more people would be pulled into wanting to get that game. The lines are starting to blur between game and movie...
That's exactly what I thought about this when I saw this: Google Maps or Google Earth. It is probably also something similar to technology used in video games that keeps progressively updating the details of an object that is far away that steadily comes closer and closer and adds detail.
And here is where a problem comes into play. Mainstream media writes a story. Blogs, friends, social networks, and family pick up on the story, and the story moves forward and propagates. What happens if mainstream media goes away? I don't see my dad suddenly becoming a roving reporter who broadcasts his news to everyone. There has to be a balance between the social aspect of moving news forward and the gathering of the news in a legitimate and professional manner.
It seems to me that the ruling was based on the variety of audio entertainment available to the consumer. It didn't focus on the specific industry of satellite radio; it centered on the fact that satellite radio is competing with land-based radio, CDs, podcasts, web streaming, HD radio, etc. With the perception that satellite radio is one of many versions of audio entertainment, this ruling makes sense to me.
I agree with you on this. It is the extreme viewpoint that grabs the attention, but also turns me off to anything that the extremist may have to say and it is the moderate that I have a tendency to listen to a bit more.
I guess as I get older, I tend to be more middle of the road when it comes to my viewpoints and I need the problems presented to me but I also need the possible solutions presented at the same time. Otherwise, I tend to think that people are just bitching if they only present problems all the time, and I'll just shut down and quit listening.
You bring up a good point and I will make it a goal of mine to remember that the term "environmentalist" covers a broad range of individuals, each with a broad range of opinion and formal and hands on experience.
That said, it is much more difficult to make broad sweeping comments about a broad group of people without the frakking author letting us know who the "environmental group" is that made the comment... I can only make comments on "environmentalists" and be as broad as the author of the original article.
I agree with you on this, but we're also getting mixed messages from various environmental groups (some more liberal than others) that all have a different take on how we're supposed to "save the planet". We have groups that told us that nuclear energy was going to kill off all the people on the earth 20 years ago, and now nuclear energy is a viable alternative to certain other types of energy sources. We had an "acid rain scare" that was going to wipe out all life on earth if we didn't change our ways of producing energy that never came around to ever happening. The extreme view of all of the environmentalists basically tells us to go back to the stone age and live in caves, and cook your meat that you hunted over a fire. Oh wait... put out that fire because it's emitting carbon back into the atmosphere and you're NOT supposed to eat meat because it is bad for you and the environment and you probably just killed off an indigenous species by eating it... However, a moderate view is to accept that small steps to reduce energy consumption is probably the best way to go, as Itchyeyes points out.
"Costing" should be reworded as "opportunity cost". Opportunity costs are counted in business because they are looked at as legitimate markers and goals that a business can look towards when deciding actions in markets and setting budgets.
If you are to believe what Piper Jaffray has to say, then AT&T Wireless is sending ~$9/month to Apple on a two year contract after giving $150 for the initial sale. That's $9*24 months*1.4 million non registered subscribers*3 years= ONE BEEEELION DOLLARS (Thank you Dr. Evil).
By going the route that is suggested, the glass is half full and you're satisfied with what you've got. If you see this as a glass-half-empty scenario and realize that you're losing a billion dollars, you're going to do your best with your shareholders' invested money and figure out how to get a chunk of that back into the pockets of your investors.
That's business folks...
The internet will be sexier because it is faster at downloading that porn you're looking for...
Wasn't the whole iPhone scare done by an 11 year old? http://blog.psmxy.org/2008/01/05/warning-malicious-repo/ If it was, then I don't quite understand the "fear is hackers may be experimenting and gathering research that will increase the dangers of a more malicious attack in the near future" thought process if this whole thing was started by an 11 year old. Are there now roving gangs of pre-pubescent crackers out there that are going after my iPhone and to take over the world?!?!
I was outraged when I first saw this on Headline News this morning, but my outrage soon turned to disgust, which gave way to mild amusement when I started seeing the story, from literally different angles, on FOX News and CNBC. The guy was an ass, and you can see that the audience didn't want to deal with him anymore and were clapping as the police led him away. This post puts the actions and consequenses together plainly and concisely. HE escalated the consequences for his actions 4 times. Time #4 was cause for use of a taser. No guns were pulled, no bullets were fired because he didn't show an action that needed those consequenses. Great post!
The thing is this: the internet is a communication device. TV is a communication device. The phone is a communication device. Why is it that it is SUDDENLY very important to make sure kids are safe online? What gives online safety priority over telephone safety? What gives online safety priority over ANY OTHER TYPE of safety? What are you going to teach next? How NOT to text and drive when the child turns 16? How NOT to grow up and be obese and have a heart attack when 45? Honestly, the schools are having a tough enough time trying to cram kids' heads with facts and and trying to teach them how to think for themselves; let's leave some of society's responsibilities in the parent's hands. It is mentioned that it takes a village to raise a child. I say "every village needs its idiot, maybe it's your child..."; I also say "the village needs everyone to have a set of responsibilities that are assigned to them to teach the child what they need to know." I don't need the village garbageman teaching the village kid about STDs and how to prevent them; I'll leave that up to Village Mom and Dad and the village doctor... Just as teachers should have a responsibility to teach certain things to the kids, parents have a certian responsibility to teach their kids things too...