Hm - there are some interesting implications with that.
IBM wants to sell chips. Apple wants to sell hardware. If IBM came out with a "desktop" or even "workstation" PowerPC machine that ran, say, Yellow Dog Linux (or PPC Suse or the like), how would Apple respond?
Especially since most of the programs made for PPC Linux can easily be ported to Apple - whether running under X11 or adding in Cocoa portions - and I'm sure Apple would be more than happy to supply a compiler that could turn PPC-X-Windows code to Aqua code - cludgy, but it could work.
If such a system took off, Apple would be pretty happy - more programs could be converted easily. And odds are, if you're already running PPC desktop, you might be looking at OS X for ease of use issues.
On the other hand - who would use such a system? Most people would probably go for x86 Linux - x86 parts are cheaper, more software is available (even on just the Linux side alone). So a person wanting a PPC desktop would have to have a very good reason, like wanting to do high-end calculations or graphics rendering.
In which case, they'd probably just go for a Mac first anyway.
Personally, I think that Apple's best move is this:
1. Keep the high-end Powermacs/powerbooks.
2. Keep the lower-cost iBooks.
3. Make the iMacs truly cost compatible. Yes, there are the eMacs - what I think would blow away the market is a $600 headless iMac. Small base, maybe like the Cube (only upgradeable - that's what killed the little guy). Most people already have monitors, and if they could by a $600 G4 Mac they'd be estatic. Apple would make money, and could eventually move them over into the more expensive stuff - and even if they didn't, they'd gain market share, which would still mean more money.
Either way, we'll have to see what happens with IBM and Apple. The 970 chips are becoming more popular (Xbox Next, anyone? - this could be a side issue about how many Xbox games could be ported to OS X if the Xbox Next is truly G5 based....), so the future could hold anything.
Anybody seen a mirror yet? I tried looking at the article before Slashdot even posted it, but I'm guessing there was some sort of n-dimensional Internet traffic, since the article was unavailble before slashdot readers should slashdot it.
Good lord - we have the ability to impact sites in all possible times and places - the clicks so numorous is overwhelms the very fabric of space and time and overwhelms a server before a link is posted.
Oddly enough, I recently saw this in Doctorow's "East Coast Tribe", but this was something I learned when I first worked in an IT department.
It doesn't matter if your systems are uber-fast. It doesn't matter if they have a low error rate. It doesn't matter if they are made to be user friendly.
If the users of those systems perceive they are slow, inefficient, hard to use, great, best machines ever - whatever they percieve, that is the reality.
So a good IT staff does two things:
1. Work on their C. I. A. pieces. 2. Work to help the users percieve their systems as being C. I. A. good.
Let's face it - this is why Microsoft is on 90-odd% of all desktop systems out there: people percieve their systems as working, as easy to use, and that everything else is inferior whether that is true or not.
Once you convince them that a Linux or Mac desktop works just as well - if not faster and more securely - on their desk as a Windows box, and that they can use the same kinds of applications, you're set.
I've had IT guys whom I respect greatly tell me they'd love to switch to "OS X", but don't want to because they fear the "learning curve". It's not a "noobie" issue at all - perception clouds everything.
And Brauner made the right calls. To those who had problems, he showed them how it was easy. To those who thought he was being mean, he displayed himself as a "fun guy" with shirts and toys. To those who thought the system was "hard" he showed a secretary doing her job with ease - the person that all my programming teachers taught me to program interface for, since "if a secretary can run it, anybody can".
Excellent work on his part for recognizing that the human element is as important as the technical one at times.
So will this ever lead to 10-in-1 NES/SNES systems? I know - there's the iQue in China, but I'd love to see a little handheld unit I can give to my kids (or myself) with Chrono Trigger/Final Fantasy III/Kid Icarus and the rest on it.
A few years ago an old Jeep buddy of mine mentioned an idea for a web site like this - people could drive around Utah, take pictures, and record the GPS coordinates of where the picture was taken so that others could find the same place for camping/etc.
This just seems to do something of what iPhoto does - attaches some meta-data (in this case, GPS coordinates, time&date, etc) to the file.
I'd say this could be pretty cool, though of course I'd like to see an open standard used and the ability to turn it off. I don't think I mind all cell phones by 2005 having GPS (the ability to save lives could be huge for 9-1-1 services), but I want the capacity to shut the damn thing off so Psycho Boy Jones can't jump me because he didn't like my recipe for spicy sweet mashed potatos.
Side note for those worried about privacy: there was a story I was reading about a service for cell phones in Japan. Suppose your spouse calls and wants a picture of where you are, and instead of working late at the office (like you said you were), you were out at the bar with your friends. This service will forward a picture of your office to them instead of your current location.
With GPS being mandatory in cell phones by 2005 (at least according to the article), you wonder how other people will tap into it? Is this a 9-1-1 services only thing, or is this "add to my GPS" list so people in other phones have your coordinates at all time? (Something that might be a new level of parental control when your teenager goes out with friends for the night....)
You'd probably want to have it check by IP address, so you could have:
Knock: 1143 5547 1212 = port 22 open
IP1: Hit port 1143. IP2: Hit port 1143. IP1: Hit port 5547 IP2: Hit port 5547 IP1: Hit port 1212 IP2: Hit port 3354
IP1 allowed, IP2 port still closed.
This would also help to stop timing issues, such as someone hitting port 22 every second in the event that a valid user "knocks" and opens the port - only the IP address of the port that performed the valid knock gets inside.
It's really just another layer of security, but an interesting idea.
And if you were "on top" and find yourself lower, that's an indication that maybe you should pay for the ads rather than trusting to luck - they're not that expensive anyway.
I've paid for ads on google to try it out, and was pretty damned pleased.
The process was simple - you tell it what words to bring up your ad, how specific like "games" versus "pc games" versus "first person shooter pc games". The more generic, the greather the chance of getting clicked, but the greater the cost. The ad is unobtrusive - just a text link (not a gigantic banner that will offend everybody else).
You can specify how many ads to pay for in advance. So if you only have enough money for 1000 clicks, it stops at 1000 - and you can either renew, or just leave it be.
Overall, it's just simple. The article mentions the bed and breakfast "Honeymoon Haven" or whatever that was worried about the service - I'd tell her not to be worried at all.
And I think that's why Google is doing the best so far: it's simple. No huge Yahoo like directories that make little sense, or extra ads cluttering the way. It gives me what I want, and if I want more, I click on it.
Perfect? No - some sites are optimizing themselvers to annoyance, like entering "'resident evil' walkthrough" and getting in the top 10 links annoying search engines or porn sites adding words and linking to each other to build up their Google score. But for 90% of the time, it's "good enough".
So just to be evil, how much money has Mr. Doctorow made from his books? In other words, has the experiment been "worth it", or does he have to do other things to supplant his income (aka "have a real job").
I just downloaded both, and plan to give them a read on Mr. Palm Pilot and if I like them, I'll probably buy Meatspace versions for family on holidays, but I'd be fascinated to see what the "download-to-purchase" ratio is.
It's the same kind of model we see in places like Megatokyo, Penny-Arcade, etc - free content with physical goods (books, T-shirts, posters, etc) being the actual income. Makes you wonder if Doctorow's endeavors are as successful, and if he should sell a T-shirt.
I would assume that Xbox Live 2 would require a $99 ethernet+HDD add in - this way the unit is inside, MS doesn't worry about "saved game hacking" or other such nonesense you'd get with an SMB share (and imagine the tech support nightmare that would be).
With an add-in HDD/Ethernet unit (much like Sony has with Final Fantasy XI), they could break even on the HDD without *having* to ship it out, and you could do all the CD ripping/sharing music in the house over a network/blah, blah, blah you wanted from there.
Not too long ago I had a comment from a reader in South America who let me know that Xboxes were very popular in the geek crowd. Why? Easily moddible, and cheap Linux boxes.
I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I'm willing to bet that Microsoft is at least worried about the possibility.
Probably the best thing to do then is print out a barcode at the top with a breakdown of voting:
President: John Adams Vice-President: Thomas Jefferson Treasurer: Etc
This way, the user gets a visual confirmation, and it's crystal clear who voted for whom. They put that chit into the ballet box (which is locked). Chits are stored. In the event of a question of fraud, the old ballot chits can be pulled out and verified - no "hanging chads" here. Users feel good "knowing" what they voted for, and the system can still be paperless.
I'd also want to see a 5% of all results double checked against what was reported, with random precincts checked to always keep things in line.
Mainly, the issue as to whether or not it will be a "big deal" if the Xbox 2 or Gamecube 2 (N5, whatever) is released before the PS3 is.
There are two scenarios:
1. No backwards compatitiliby. Remember, this really came along with the PS2 and the Game Boy systems, but most consoles have not been backwards compatible.
If you believe the rumors that the Xbox 2 will be a PowerPC chip (perhaps even a slimmed down version of the PPC 970 aka "G5" chip), then the odds of backwards compatibility lies in the realm of the possible, but not likely in my book.
So that means an Xbox 2 might ship without backwards compatibility, which leaves it in the current market problem is has now: powerful system, but not as many games as the PS2, and not as many good "first person games" as the Gamecube. Right now, the only advantage the Xbox has going for it is Xbox Live (though I'm honest curious to know if this is a money making segment of the Xbox division or not).
2. Backwards compatible. Suppose that MS uses its recently purchased Virtual PC technology or some hardware based solution to emulate Xbox 1 titles, that might give it a leg up in the future. Rather than releasing a system and starting from scratch again, they would have the current library (especially Halo), and whatever Xbox Online subscribers would be making the jump.
But even if they do make the jump, will it still be enough? Japanese support started halfway decently, dropped, and now it seems some developers (Konami, Sammy, and a few others) are giving it another chance.
As things stand, the Xbox and the Gamecube are neck-in-neck in sales, with the latter actually being profitable by itself while the Xbox, from most of the financial reports seen, is still a major loss leader for MS.
A cheaper Xbox *will* drive sales of the consoles, but the best thing MS can do is get some better first-party games out, and do *something* to bring in more Japanese gamers. Their biggest fear should be that Sony finally gets their online game in order, because once that does, the wealth of PS2 titles that could be brought online would quickly bury the Xbox Live segment in total users.
Time will tell. I'm pretty patient either way, though I wish I could get my kids to bed earlier so I could play more of "Fatal Frame 2". (Man that game is creeping me out.)
I guess my question would be "why do you need those things"?
For my iPod (30 GB, if you're curious), I got a dock but never use it. I just plug it into the cord every so often to sync up my audio books or some such.
So for most of the items, I'd say they are truly "extras". Don't get me wrong - I personally think the mini-iPod should be $199, but after reading the Ars article as well with that handy little table I'm leaning more towards the "Probably *is* worth the cost".
Either way, I'll hope for a price drop, mainly because I want to get my wife one for our Anniversary.
I am not a constitutional lawyer or any great expert in history, so if I get any details right or wrong I'll apologize in advance.
I personally don't have an issue with IBM or any other number of companies applying for patents in principle. After all, a lot of that is what I would call "defensive patents" which I have a whole separate issue with and won't go into here.
I do have one major problem with a lot of the patents I've been seeing lately on "business processes". I believe that the Founding Fathers had a basic idea about patents:
It was for inventions. Something you could build and use. If you couldn't build it, then details blueprints on how the "repeater rifle" was going to look at the end or "the automatic banana peeler".
Not a wish or a dream or some vague concept on how something is going to work, or a method of how to go from A to B by sticking your thumb up your ass turning in a circle and singing "I can fly". Not for the genetic code of a field mouse that Nature kicked up and you discovered the genetic sequence - though you could probably patent the gel used to discover the genetic markers. That's fair game.
Inventions. An actual item that can be built in the real world. And it seems that for whatever reason, our members of congress or the senate or whichever slick son of a bitch (or daughter, whatever) who seems to exist only to bend over and get reamed by the latest lobbyist promising that patenting "business procedures is good for the economy!" is not doing their job by the Founding Fathers.
Who, if they saw what patents are being used for today, would probably use a big old switch on the idiots allowing patents like this to go through. Lord knows, they didn't invent the "willow tree supple butt-swacker switch", but they probably knew how to use it when people acted like asses.
Of course, this is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
That has to be the best damned article I've read on the "SCO" case. Granted, it was slanted against SCO - but it provided logical, point-by-point facts about the history of the case. No new arguments for the geek crowd - but that's one I'll print out and show to the non-geeks I work with who haven't understood what the big deal is.
While we're at it, Mr. Johnson's article should be printed out and mailed to every member of Congress, the Senate, and to Mr. Bush to stop any of the "anti-Open Source" lobbyists dead in their tracks.
I used to live in Salt Lake and remember how good the "City Weekly" was, but I had forgotten that every so often, those bastards could really write.
Oh, duh - I went back and reexamined the article again. I get it - it's not the *generation* of He^3 that's the problem, it's the processing when they get it to Earth.
Ignoring the issues of transportation, construction, etc, etc, etc, the "creation of more energy than it uses" strikes me as fascinating.
The goal behind using He^3 is that you can transport it. Cool the sucker down, put it into a canister, ship it back to Earth and use it there. Next thing you know, the Middle East doesn't matter anymore. (Please, no politics.)
Again, ignoring the issues of having the stuff explode on reintry, how to get it all back, etc, etc, etc.
But the energy issue really isn't one. Last time I checked, the Moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so solar energy is easier to get to than on Earth. At that point, you can have a system produce all the He^3 you want, and who cares about initial efficiency when you've got Big Old Mr. Sun providing your energy for you?
Just a thought. This is the kind of thing that 100 years down the road could be useful, and I'm probably making bad assumptions, but the idea is still kind of cool.
On the one hand, that's my first response: What the Hell is Nintendo thinking? A portable system with two screens? I mean - what?
But on the other hand, I can look at this and say "Well, but - maybe." The idea itself is nothing new compared to playing, say, Descent, Quake, or Baldur's Gate with 2 monitors the way I've always wanted to play them - a menu or map on one side, and the "gameplay" on the other.
The screens sound about the size of a Gameboy Advance screen. Remember, Nintendo - back light, please Lord backlight. It will require a different kind of thinking for developers.
Nintendo isn't crash proof (Virtual Boy, anyone?) but this product is certainly interesting, and has some potential for RPG's, strategy games, maybe FPS kind of games. If nothing else, it certainly can give the PSP some interesting introductory challenges to face.
To be honest, I never thought that Legend was really that great. "Wheel of Time" was interesting and good looking, but nothing to really go nuts about. "Unreal 2" was another - nice, but not supreme.
This sounds more like capitalistic market forces working than (in Interplay's case) Point Haired Bosses making silly decisions.
I'm one of those guys who used a lot of Linux, still like it on the server side and now I use OS X on the desktop side, but at the advice of some of the penetration testers I worked with, I decided to give OpenBSD a shot on my rebuilt home server.
It's one of those things where for a bit, I was a little confused on how things work. Granted, OpenBSD is not as "user friendly" on the install as, say, Red Hat 9, where you click the pretty buttons and things install. But thanks to a copy of "Absolute OpenBSD", I got it installed.
And I have to admit - for my server love, it's working pretty well. The ports system works like I'd always dreamed RPM's to work - tell it "install", and it gets the source, check it for dependancies, and go on.
The Flavor setting is another one I think I can live with, since you can specify there things like "Plaintext imap" versus default "secure imap" and the like.
And everything is right where I'd expect it. Ports installed files are in local, so now I can remember where everything is at once it's installed.
And it's pretty small - little "crufiness", and the community has been great. Like when I couldn't get Apache, PHP, and MySql to play. Turns out it was a socket issue (Apache on OpenBSD by default only wants to see things in/var/www and none else), but within hours someone posted a polite "Oh, try this".
So far, as a server system, I'm beginning to groove on it. Perhaps if I wanted to run it as a desktop I might or might not have other issues, but since I've got a different OS for my desktop things, I'm pretty pleased with the BSD system.
Next up: learning how to upgrade. Not that I need to yet, but it's that "yet" that I'm anticipating. (Hey, there could always be another ssh exploit - you never know.)
Most likely, yes. If they do it right, you should fill out a form online, get some sort of number or perhaps a barcode print out, take it to a USPS center where they will validate you with a picture ID (Drivers license), then give you access to your keys, perhaps through a username/password combination.
Why this way? Remember: lying to the post office is a Federal Offense, and can get you jail time. That's why they like the whole "make you show up" concept: it (should) keep people from being naughty, especially if they take the extra step and request a fingerprint or some other biometric that will scare the pants off of most would-be identity thieves.
I've been working on something similiar for another division of the US government.
The biggest thing driving this are two issues:
1. Government Paperwork Eliminiation Act - signed by Clinton, it basically tells the various agencies:
1. "reduce paperwork by having forms available online".
2. "When possible, have those forms electronically signed."
The problem is that most government agencies, except maybe the IRS, and then in limited form, really don't have any kind of system set up for doing #2. They're getting pretty good at #1 (having documents available online), but #2 has been a challenge.
The biggest challenge is initial setup. For the Department of Agriculture, you can do electronic signatures over the web. But first you must physically show up at one of their offices, validate your identify, and then you're good to go.
That works all right for them, but suppose you're somebody like the IRS, with around, oh, 200 million "clients". Now you have to process them all, validate their identity which means having them show up at a local office (long lines and all). Then there's the issue of what system to use, validation procedures, how to keep Joe American from forgetting their password, and if they lose it, how do they get it back in a way that's secure and doesn't cost a lot of money?
2. Money. Believe it or not, most people in government agencies really want to save money, not spend all of it.
Honest.
So by having electronic signatures, they can reduce paperwork, install workflow systems so that when a document is digitally signed it can be forwarded right to the people who need to see it to be reviewed in minutes instead of days, without all the messy paper getting lost and so on.
I'll probably be checking out the USPS's system to see what they do. If it's reasonable, secure, ensures privacy, and truly has an open API that would allow other agencies to develop systems based on it, it may be the electronic signature "standard" that some government agencies are looking for.
That actually depresses me a bit, as I had bought some music off of mp3.com when it was around (believe it or not: the Megatokyo soundtrack. Yeah, I'm a geek.).
It was one of the few places where an independant artist could try and sell their wares without RIAA influence.
Now, it seems that Vivendi is doing everything they can to kill it off and make sure that the independant artists have no options to be heard by the public except through "established channels" - aka, through the Music Cartel.
Slashdot Mirror
Hm - there are some interesting implications with that.
IBM wants to sell chips. Apple wants to sell hardware. If IBM came out with a "desktop" or even "workstation" PowerPC machine that ran, say, Yellow Dog Linux (or PPC Suse or the like), how would Apple respond?
Especially since most of the programs made for PPC Linux can easily be ported to Apple - whether running under X11 or adding in Cocoa portions - and I'm sure Apple would be more than happy to supply a compiler that could turn PPC-X-Windows code to Aqua code - cludgy, but it could work.
If such a system took off, Apple would be pretty happy - more programs could be converted easily. And odds are, if you're already running PPC desktop, you might be looking at OS X for ease of use issues.
On the other hand - who would use such a system? Most people would probably go for x86 Linux - x86 parts are cheaper, more software is available (even on just the Linux side alone). So a person wanting a PPC desktop would have to have a very good reason, like wanting to do high-end calculations or graphics rendering.
In which case, they'd probably just go for a Mac first anyway.
Personally, I think that Apple's best move is this:
1. Keep the high-end Powermacs/powerbooks.
2. Keep the lower-cost iBooks.
3. Make the iMacs truly cost compatible. Yes, there are the eMacs - what I think would blow away the market is a $600 headless iMac. Small base, maybe like the Cube (only upgradeable - that's what killed the little guy). Most people already have monitors, and if they could by a $600 G4 Mac they'd be estatic. Apple would make money, and could eventually move them over into the more expensive stuff - and even if they didn't, they'd gain market share, which would still mean more money.
Either way, we'll have to see what happens with IBM and Apple. The 970 chips are becoming more popular (Xbox Next, anyone? - this could be a side issue about how many Xbox games could be ported to OS X if the Xbox Next is truly G5 based....), so the future could hold anything.
Anybody seen a mirror yet? I tried looking at the article before Slashdot even posted it, but I'm guessing there was some sort of n-dimensional Internet traffic, since the article was unavailble before slashdot readers should slashdot it.
Good lord - we have the ability to impact sites in all possible times and places - the clicks so numorous is overwhelms the very fabric of space and time and overwhelms a server before a link is posted.
Oddly enough, I recently saw this in Doctorow's "East Coast Tribe", but this was something I learned when I first worked in an IT department.
It doesn't matter if your systems are uber-fast. It doesn't matter if they have a low error rate. It doesn't matter if they are made to be user friendly.
If the users of those systems perceive they are slow, inefficient, hard to use, great, best machines ever - whatever they percieve, that is the reality.
So a good IT staff does two things:
1. Work on their C. I. A. pieces.
2. Work to help the users percieve their systems as being C. I. A. good.
Let's face it - this is why Microsoft is on 90-odd% of all desktop systems out there: people percieve their systems as working, as easy to use, and that everything else is inferior whether that is true or not.
Once you convince them that a Linux or Mac desktop works just as well - if not faster and more securely - on their desk as a Windows box, and that they can use the same kinds of applications, you're set.
I've had IT guys whom I respect greatly tell me they'd love to switch to "OS X", but don't want to because they fear the "learning curve". It's not a "noobie" issue at all - perception clouds everything.
And Brauner made the right calls. To those who had problems, he showed them how it was easy. To those who thought he was being mean, he displayed himself as a "fun guy" with shirts and toys. To those who thought the system was "hard" he showed a secretary doing her job with ease - the person that all my programming teachers taught me to program interface for, since "if a secretary can run it, anybody can".
Excellent work on his part for recognizing that the human element is as important as the technical one at times.
So will this ever lead to 10-in-1 NES/SNES systems? I know - there's the iQue in China, but I'd love to see a little handheld unit I can give to my kids (or myself) with Chrono Trigger/Final Fantasy III/Kid Icarus and the rest on it.
A few years ago an old Jeep buddy of mine mentioned an idea for a web site like this - people could drive around Utah, take pictures, and record the GPS coordinates of where the picture was taken so that others could find the same place for camping/etc.
This just seems to do something of what iPhoto does - attaches some meta-data (in this case, GPS coordinates, time&date, etc) to the file.
I'd say this could be pretty cool, though of course I'd like to see an open standard used and the ability to turn it off. I don't think I mind all cell phones by 2005 having GPS (the ability to save lives could be huge for 9-1-1 services), but I want the capacity to shut the damn thing off so Psycho Boy Jones can't jump me because he didn't like my recipe for spicy sweet mashed potatos.
Side note for those worried about privacy: there was a story I was reading about a service for cell phones in Japan. Suppose your spouse calls and wants a picture of where you are, and instead of working late at the office (like you said you were), you were out at the bar with your friends. This service will forward a picture of your office to them instead of your current location.
With GPS being mandatory in cell phones by 2005 (at least according to the article), you wonder how other people will tap into it? Is this a 9-1-1 services only thing, or is this "add to my GPS" list so people in other phones have your coordinates at all time? (Something that might be a new level of parental control when your teenager goes out with friends for the night....)
You'd probably want to have it check by IP address, so you could have:
Knock: 1143 5547 1212 = port 22 open
IP1: Hit port 1143.
IP2: Hit port 1143.
IP1: Hit port 5547
IP2: Hit port 5547
IP1: Hit port 1212
IP2: Hit port 3354
IP1 allowed, IP2 port still closed.
This would also help to stop timing issues, such as someone hitting port 22 every second in the event that a valid user "knocks" and opens the port - only the IP address of the port that performed the valid knock gets inside.
It's really just another layer of security, but an interesting idea.
And if you were "on top" and find yourself lower, that's an indication that maybe you should pay for the ads rather than trusting to luck - they're not that expensive anyway.
I've paid for ads on google to try it out, and was pretty damned pleased.
The process was simple - you tell it what words to bring up your ad, how specific like "games" versus "pc games" versus "first person shooter pc games". The more generic, the greather the chance of getting clicked, but the greater the cost. The ad is unobtrusive - just a text link (not a gigantic banner that will offend everybody else).
You can specify how many ads to pay for in advance. So if you only have enough money for 1000 clicks, it stops at 1000 - and you can either renew, or just leave it be.
Overall, it's just simple. The article mentions the bed and breakfast "Honeymoon Haven" or whatever that was worried about the service - I'd tell her not to be worried at all.
And I think that's why Google is doing the best so far: it's simple. No huge Yahoo like directories that make little sense, or extra ads cluttering the way. It gives me what I want, and if I want more, I click on it.
Perfect? No - some sites are optimizing themselvers to annoyance, like entering "'resident evil' walkthrough" and getting in the top 10 links annoying search engines or porn sites adding words and linking to each other to build up their Google score. But for 90% of the time, it's "good enough".
So just to be evil, how much money has Mr. Doctorow made from his books? In other words, has the experiment been "worth it", or does he have to do other things to supplant his income (aka "have a real job").
I just downloaded both, and plan to give them a read on Mr. Palm Pilot and if I like them, I'll probably buy Meatspace versions for family on holidays, but I'd be fascinated to see what the "download-to-purchase" ratio is.
It's the same kind of model we see in places like Megatokyo, Penny-Arcade, etc - free content with physical goods (books, T-shirts, posters, etc) being the actual income. Makes you wonder if Doctorow's endeavors are as successful, and if he should sell a T-shirt.
I would assume that Xbox Live 2 would require a $99 ethernet+HDD add in - this way the unit is inside, MS doesn't worry about "saved game hacking" or other such nonesense you'd get with an SMB share (and imagine the tech support nightmare that would be).
With an add-in HDD/Ethernet unit (much like Sony has with Final Fantasy XI), they could break even on the HDD without *having* to ship it out, and you could do all the CD ripping/sharing music in the house over a network/blah, blah, blah you wanted from there.
Actually, I would have to disagree.
Not too long ago I had a comment from a reader in South America who let me know that Xboxes were very popular in the geek crowd. Why? Easily moddible, and cheap Linux boxes.
I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I'm willing to bet that Microsoft is at least worried about the possibility.
Probably the best thing to do then is print out a barcode at the top with a breakdown of voting:
President: John Adams
Vice-President: Thomas Jefferson
Treasurer: Etc
This way, the user gets a visual confirmation, and it's crystal clear who voted for whom. They put that chit into the ballet box (which is locked). Chits are stored. In the event of a question of fraud, the old ballot chits can be pulled out and verified - no "hanging chads" here. Users feel good "knowing" what they voted for, and the system can still be paperless.
I'd also want to see a 5% of all results double checked against what was reported, with random precincts checked to always keep things in line.
Mainly, the issue as to whether or not it will be a "big deal" if the Xbox 2 or Gamecube 2 (N5, whatever) is released before the PS3 is.
There are two scenarios:
1. No backwards compatitiliby. Remember, this really came along with the PS2 and the Game Boy systems, but most consoles have not been backwards compatible.
If you believe the rumors that the Xbox 2 will be a PowerPC chip (perhaps even a slimmed down version of the PPC 970 aka "G5" chip), then the odds of backwards compatibility lies in the realm of the possible, but not likely in my book.
So that means an Xbox 2 might ship without backwards compatibility, which leaves it in the current market problem is has now: powerful system, but not as many games as the PS2, and not as many good "first person games" as the Gamecube. Right now, the only advantage the Xbox has going for it is Xbox Live (though I'm honest curious to know if this is a money making segment of the Xbox division or not).
2. Backwards compatible. Suppose that MS uses its recently purchased Virtual PC technology or some hardware based solution to emulate Xbox 1 titles, that might give it a leg up in the future. Rather than releasing a system and starting from scratch again, they would have the current library (especially Halo), and whatever Xbox Online subscribers would be making the jump.
But even if they do make the jump, will it still be enough? Japanese support started halfway decently, dropped, and now it seems some developers (Konami, Sammy, and a few others) are giving it another chance.
As things stand, the Xbox and the Gamecube are neck-in-neck in sales, with the latter actually being profitable by itself while the Xbox, from most of the financial reports seen, is still a major loss leader for MS.
A cheaper Xbox *will* drive sales of the consoles, but the best thing MS can do is get some better first-party games out, and do *something* to bring in more Japanese gamers. Their biggest fear should be that Sony finally gets their online game in order, because once that does, the wealth of PS2 titles that could be brought online would quickly bury the Xbox Live segment in total users.
Time will tell. I'm pretty patient either way, though I wish I could get my kids to bed earlier so I could play more of "Fatal Frame 2". (Man that game is creeping me out.)
I guess my question would be "why do you need those things"?
For my iPod (30 GB, if you're curious), I got a dock but never use it. I just plug it into the cord every so often to sync up my audio books or some such.
So for most of the items, I'd say they are truly "extras". Don't get me wrong - I personally think the mini-iPod should be $199, but after reading the Ars article as well with that handy little table I'm leaning more towards the "Probably *is* worth the cost".
Either way, I'll hope for a price drop, mainly because I want to get my wife one for our Anniversary.
According to the Mormons, it means "honey bee". Comes from their "Book of Mormon". That's why the Utah state flag is a beehive.
I am not a constitutional lawyer or any great expert in history, so if I get any details right or wrong I'll apologize in advance.
I personally don't have an issue with IBM or any other number of companies applying for patents in principle. After all, a lot of that is what I would call "defensive patents" which I have a whole separate issue with and won't go into here.
I do have one major problem with a lot of the patents I've been seeing lately on "business processes". I believe that the Founding Fathers had a basic idea about patents:
It was for inventions. Something you could build and use. If you couldn't build it, then details blueprints on how the "repeater rifle" was going to look at the end or "the automatic banana peeler".
Not a wish or a dream or some vague concept on how something is going to work, or a method of how to go from A to B by sticking your thumb up your ass turning in a circle and singing "I can fly". Not for the genetic code of a field mouse that Nature kicked up and you discovered the genetic sequence - though you could probably patent the gel used to discover the genetic markers. That's fair game.
Inventions. An actual item that can be built in the real world. And it seems that for whatever reason, our members of congress or the senate or whichever slick son of a bitch (or daughter, whatever) who seems to exist only to bend over and get reamed by the latest lobbyist promising that patenting "business procedures is good for the economy!" is not doing their job by the Founding Fathers.
Who, if they saw what patents are being used for today, would probably use a big old switch on the idiots allowing patents like this to go through. Lord knows, they didn't invent the "willow tree supple butt-swacker switch", but they probably knew how to use it when people acted like asses.
Of course, this is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
That has to be the best damned article I've read on the "SCO" case. Granted, it was slanted against SCO - but it provided logical, point-by-point facts about the history of the case. No new arguments for the geek crowd - but that's one I'll print out and show to the non-geeks I work with who haven't understood what the big deal is.
While we're at it, Mr. Johnson's article should be printed out and mailed to every member of Congress, the Senate, and to Mr. Bush to stop any of the "anti-Open Source" lobbyists dead in their tracks.
I used to live in Salt Lake and remember how good the "City Weekly" was, but I had forgotten that every so often, those bastards could really write.
Oh, duh - I went back and reexamined the article again. I get it - it's not the *generation* of He^3 that's the problem, it's the processing when they get it to Earth.
Yeah - color me stupid. Sorry.
Ignoring the issues of transportation, construction, etc, etc, etc, the "creation of more energy than it uses" strikes me as fascinating.
The goal behind using He^3 is that you can transport it. Cool the sucker down, put it into a canister, ship it back to Earth and use it there. Next thing you know, the Middle East doesn't matter anymore. (Please, no politics.)
Again, ignoring the issues of having the stuff explode on reintry, how to get it all back, etc, etc, etc.
But the energy issue really isn't one. Last time I checked, the Moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so solar energy is easier to get to than on Earth. At that point, you can have a system produce all the He^3 you want, and who cares about initial efficiency when you've got Big Old Mr. Sun providing your energy for you?
Just a thought. This is the kind of thing that 100 years down the road could be useful, and I'm probably making bad assumptions, but the idea is still kind of cool.
On the one hand, that's my first response: What the Hell is Nintendo thinking? A portable system with two screens? I mean - what?
But on the other hand, I can look at this and say "Well, but - maybe." The idea itself is nothing new compared to playing, say, Descent, Quake, or Baldur's Gate with 2 monitors the way I've always wanted to play them - a menu or map on one side, and the "gameplay" on the other.
The screens sound about the size of a Gameboy Advance screen. Remember, Nintendo - back light, please Lord backlight. It will require a different kind of thinking for developers.
Nintendo isn't crash proof (Virtual Boy, anyone?) but this product is certainly interesting, and has some potential for RPG's, strategy games, maybe FPS kind of games. If nothing else, it certainly can give the PSP some interesting introductory challenges to face.
To be honest, I never thought that Legend was really that great. "Wheel of Time" was interesting and good looking, but nothing to really go nuts about. "Unreal 2" was another - nice, but not supreme.
This sounds more like capitalistic market forces working than (in Interplay's case) Point Haired Bosses making silly decisions.
I'm one of those guys who used a lot of Linux, still like it on the server side and now I use OS X on the desktop side, but at the advice of some of the penetration testers I worked with, I decided to give OpenBSD a shot on my rebuilt home server.
/var/www and none else), but within hours someone posted a polite "Oh, try this".
It's one of those things where for a bit, I was a little confused on how things work. Granted, OpenBSD is not as "user friendly" on the install as, say, Red Hat 9, where you click the pretty buttons and things install. But thanks to a copy of "Absolute OpenBSD", I got it installed.
And I have to admit - for my server love, it's working pretty well. The ports system works like I'd always dreamed RPM's to work - tell it "install", and it gets the source, check it for dependancies, and go on.
The Flavor setting is another one I think I can live with, since you can specify there things like "Plaintext imap" versus default "secure imap" and the like.
And everything is right where I'd expect it. Ports installed files are in local, so now I can remember where everything is at once it's installed.
And it's pretty small - little "crufiness", and the community has been great. Like when I couldn't get Apache, PHP, and MySql to play. Turns out it was a socket issue (Apache on OpenBSD by default only wants to see things in
So far, as a server system, I'm beginning to groove on it. Perhaps if I wanted to run it as a desktop I might or might not have other issues, but since I've got a different OS for my desktop things, I'm pretty pleased with the BSD system.
Next up: learning how to upgrade. Not that I need to yet, but it's that "yet" that I'm anticipating. (Hey, there could always be another ssh exploit - you never know.)
Most likely, yes. If they do it right, you should fill out a form online, get some sort of number or perhaps a barcode print out, take it to a USPS center where they will validate you with a picture ID (Drivers license), then give you access to your keys, perhaps through a username/password combination.
Why this way? Remember: lying to the post office is a Federal Offense, and can get you jail time. That's why they like the whole "make you show up" concept: it (should) keep people from being naughty, especially if they take the extra step and request a fingerprint or some other biometric that will scare the pants off of most would-be identity thieves.
I've been working on something similiar for another division of the US government.
;).
The biggest thing driving this are two issues:
1. Government Paperwork Eliminiation Act - signed by Clinton, it basically tells the various agencies:
1. "reduce paperwork by having forms available online".
2. "When possible, have those forms electronically signed."
The problem is that most government agencies, except maybe the IRS, and then in limited form, really don't have any kind of system set up for doing #2. They're getting pretty good at #1 (having documents available online), but #2 has been a challenge.
The biggest challenge is initial setup. For the Department of Agriculture, you can do electronic signatures over the web. But first you must physically show up at one of their offices, validate your identify, and then you're good to go.
That works all right for them, but suppose you're somebody like the IRS, with around, oh, 200 million "clients". Now you have to process them all, validate their identity which means having them show up at a local office (long lines and all). Then there's the issue of what system to use, validation procedures, how to keep Joe American from forgetting their password, and if they lose it, how do they get it back in a way that's secure and doesn't cost a lot of money?
2. Money. Believe it or not, most people in government agencies really want to save money, not spend all of it.
Honest.
So by having electronic signatures, they can reduce paperwork, install workflow systems so that when a document is digitally signed it can be forwarded right to the people who need to see it to be reviewed in minutes instead of days, without all the messy paper getting lost and so on.
I'll probably be checking out the USPS's system to see what they do. If it's reasonable, secure, ensures privacy, and truly has an open API that would allow other agencies to develop systems based on it, it may be the electronic signature "standard" that some government agencies are looking for.
Guess I'd better RTFA now
That actually depresses me a bit, as I had bought some music off of mp3.com when it was around (believe it or not: the Megatokyo soundtrack. Yeah, I'm a geek.).
It was one of the few places where an independant artist could try and sell their wares without RIAA influence.
Now, it seems that Vivendi is doing everything they can to kill it off and make sure that the independant artists have no options to be heard by the public except through "established channels" - aka, through the Music Cartel.