I suspect you are also the editor of a publication in competition to InfoWorld. Your arguments are carefully thought out, your written English is impeccable, your paragraph construction is correct, yet you failed to make a single joke about the clear conflict of interest, ruined it for the rest of us, and even gave credence to it by kissing his butt.
Who says it's Apple cutting the strings? Apple has plenty of licensing agreements that surely require Apple to intervene when interests are compromised. They crippled iPods for the sake of record labels for the iTunes store, i.e. disabled iPod-to-iPod transfers and recording capabilities. That's the only reason two iPods can't be linked and synchronized over Firewire (yes they could do that without a computer as host), otherwise they could only sell one copy of a song to each high school at best. I imagine Verizon doesn't want iPhones using VOIP over 3G either.
I think it's a bad move. 95% of people willing and able to jailbreak an iPhone are also willing and able to pirate apps. All this does is assure that they do. I bet more than half the jailbreakers buy apps legitimately, even those using VOIP over 3G. It's like they're treating a rash by amputating the leg.
File this under fall-out from using real people for quality control. Coincidentally, one of the most beneficial uses of Facebook is those extremely lame quizzes that replace paid census groups.
Beware the lab rat aspect of social networking. It's pretty easy to avoid if you're not an incurable idiot. Sometimes I can't help but be thankful there are so many stupider people out there to determine what's stupid for me. I almost don't need to be smart anymore.
Yes, that was supposed to be creepy and self-deprecating. So is the motivation behind the capitalism of social networking.
Actually the answer is until the RIAA's legal costs cannot result in an effective deterrent to others.
The curious part of the RIAA-slamming campaign is that it actually promotes malicious litigation by the RIAA. If nobody were aware of their legal misdeeds, they wouldn't bother to do them. But since they're well publicized, they're encouraged to be as atrocious as possible to send their "we're going to get you" message to as wide an audience as possible.
The fact is, like it or not, they are incurring annual losses in the 10's of millions, and their campaign of legal harassment is working, thanks largely to blog threads like this. Sometimes injustice is best left unnoticed.
How moot is this argument! We're talking about linux users here. I think they can decide which is right for them and install it themselves. Who cares what comes on the install disc!
So what if some geek listens in on my phone calls as they're recorded by big brother. I'm not dumb enough to say anything I want to keep private over a cel phone anyway. And I'm not even a drug dealer.
Analog summation requires an analog line running the length of the phone, which cannot be effectively shielded against the massive interference imposed by all digital circuitry, especially the transceiver, since all systems share the same power source and there's no true ground other than the battery's negative terminal.
Digital mixing requires that the microphone output and incoming cellular signal be in sync, either by a master clock to eliminate jitter or by some form of chasing to smooth out jitter, which would introduce significant latency. Both methods will draw on the battery, especially chasing, not to mention the draw from the extra speaker output of two voices rather than one.
In any event, there are no accommodations made for the feedback signal in the ganged chips, so it would require a complete redesign of the input and output chips, and the circuit paths between them.
Also noise reduction is done digitally, so the analog feedback signal will not benefit from it, and you'll be amplifying background noise, plus add the electrical noise, you won't be able to hear the person on the other end except under ideal circumstances. And when a text comes in mid-call - "ECK ECK ECK ECK ECK"
I thought that way once, but I was wrong. With the help of friends and family, I've successfully limited my addictive behavior to days that end in 'y'.
Microphone feedback isn't there because it IS hard. Cel phones can't be nearly so small without ganging several components into one chip. Analog signal from the microphone comes in, and a bandwidth-limited dynamic-expanded noise-reduced data-compressed GSM-encrypted digital signal comes out. Similarly the amplifier to the speaker is ganged to the GSM decoder, data-expander, dynamics-compressor, and DAC. Adding voice feedback means complete chip redesigns.
But wait there's more! If the feedback signal is analog, it will be noisy from the phone's unavoidable massive EM and RF interference. Raise your hand if you've ever heard the "eck eck eck eck eck" noise a cel phone makes over the mic at karaoke. Multiply that by about 100.
If the feedback signal is digital, it will require the whole circuit to be redesigned with a master clock to regulate the timings of digital operations in the various chips since the data flow will be parallel instead of serial. Or you could put memory buffers at all points so the chips can chase each other instead of locking, but then you get latency. Oh wait, I forgot to mention the chips already have integrated buffers... my bad.
Call in the next five minutes and we'll throw in additional battery drain!
And it's not worth making a movie unless it has franchise potential, yeah yeah yeah... The problem isn't the game, it's the players. If they had that approach all along the great movies of the past would have lead to great movie franchises. The problem now is they're making sensationalistic tripe catering to new technologies instead of traditional plot and character development.
Similarly, if you look back, the best playing games (not necessarily the best selling) were made for systems late in their life cycle, after their technical potential had been reached, and there was no new fluff to exploit. Games had to stand on their game play, at least until another console with fancier video processors arrived.
It's not bait and switch if they stop offering a service in favor of suggestive selling. If they claimed they still offered it that would be another thing, but since it came to our attention, obviously they're not hiding it.
How many people buy just the box when they get a computer?
People who are upgrading from an obsolete computer but already have a decent monitor and accessories? Good LCD monitors have been out long enough to outlive a PC's 18-month built-in obsolescence. My monitors turned 4 last month, no desire to replace them yet. And a 4-year-old printer will probably outlast a new disposable one...
Anti-lock brakes work because it doesn't matter what the situation is. Locked brakes are never good.
Wrong. Locked brakes stop cars faster on loose surfaces like gravel roads. Just a few posts above I was complaining about driver education...
And as bad as 3000 deaths a month sounds, the part of that sample you don't mention are the number of people who go from point A to point B each day unscathed. Looked at that way, cars seem downright safe compared to say, being shot at in Afghanistan.
That comparison is almost as dumb as the fact that more people have died in car accidents in the US since 1940 than all American wars combined. What makes my comparison creepy is that it's actually part of an official USMC recruitment speech. My problem is that I, as an educated driver, am just as likely to be hit by a bad driver as a bad driver is. I'd much rather people learned how to drive better than learned stupid comparisons suggesting they don't need to learn to drive better.
And actually speeding isn't as much a problem as a wide difference in speeds between drivers on the same road. Everyone doing 20% over the limit is safer than some doing the limit and others doing 20% over. Speed limits should be very strictly enforced and vary depending on the conditions too.
One great use for in-car communications is highway information. That way the speed limit could be changed at any time and drivers kept informed. The car's computer could indicate if you're over the limit, without ratting you out, however the transponders at every on-ramp and off-ramp will be tricky to fool. If you get from ramp A to ramp B in less time than it would take doing the legal limit, expect a warning or fine in the mail.
The odd thing is that many toll roads record the incoming and outgoing times without the information being used to catch speeders. That really stumps me.
Fixed the subject heading for you. There is only one cause for every vehicle collision on the road: DRIVER ERROR. (note I said vehicle collision, not deer collision for example)
Everything you've suggested is just padding. The more padding you put on a football player, the harder they hit. The safer the cars, the less drivers concern themselves with safe driving.
For example, who here routinely keeps their blind spots clear? If you don't, remember to tell the officer "the other car came out of NOWHERE!" But you've never been in a serious accident, so you must be a good driver, right? Just like everyone else who gets into serious accidents...
As for your swerving safety mechanisms, a good driver would disable them rather than surrender control of their vehicle. It wouldn't be long before some assholes start selling dog collars with those RF chips to keep dogs (which their owners irresponsibly let run on the roads) from being run over. Most of the time it is better to run over a small animal rather than risk losing control of the vehicle. Meanwhile many cars don't allow for their anti-lock brakes to be disabled, even though it's better to disable anti-lock brakes on gravel roads. Handing over control to technology can only be effective if absolutely every vehicle on the road is fully controlled by a unified system.
The investment you mention should be spent on driver training and higher license requirements. The more technology goes into cars, the more drivers need to know to operate the vehicle responsibly. Driver education is already well behind the technological advances, and the longer people survive their poor driving habits, the harder it is to teach them they're wrong.
5W internally can kill, but the likelihood of accidentally generating 5W internally from a 5W induction mat is below negligible. Keep in mind they use much more powerful induction mats (aka induction stoves) at chain restaurants like Boston Pizza, where the intelligence of the cooks can rival infants.
Two batteries, one in use, one always either charging or charged.
Batteries are easily swapped.
The devices have a small built-in battery or capacitor allowing for 30 seconds of idle operation without battery so reboot isn't necessary during battery swap.
The charger has many pins to accomodate a wide variety of batteries, and can auto-sense battery type and pin polarity (unless the battery has abslutely no charge, rare).
Battery chargers are easier and cheaper than robust mini power jacks and on-board charging circuitry. The reboot part is the main reason cameras use battery chargers and cel phones use power adapters.
What other storage medium has been crippled for the convenience of being able to sell *exactly* the same chip/disk at different capacities with very different prices?
Good ole 5.25" floppy disks were available single-sided, with a notch on one side to tell the drive it was writable, or more expensive double-sided with notches on both sides. Cut an extra notch on a single-sided disk and you could write to both sides.
Now that's a hack!...get it?
What was really weird was that certain C64 games could not be copied onto cheaper media, you needed the r33ty BASF disks for the good filez. There's a backwards example, same capacity and format, but held more valuable data...
Slashdot Mirror
Sure am glad I have a gas guzzler. I paid for that full tank of gas I want to use it.
Wow. An ill-thought car analogy on /. Thought I'd never see the day.
I suspect you are also the editor of a publication in competition to InfoWorld. Your arguments are carefully thought out, your written English is impeccable, your paragraph construction is correct, yet you failed to make a single joke about the clear conflict of interest, ruined it for the rest of us, and even gave credence to it by kissing his butt.
You can and must do better.
Makes sense, he lies to get money, lies about money to get sex, then gets fucked.
Who says it's Apple cutting the strings? Apple has plenty of licensing agreements that surely require Apple to intervene when interests are compromised. They crippled iPods for the sake of record labels for the iTunes store, i.e. disabled iPod-to-iPod transfers and recording capabilities. That's the only reason two iPods can't be linked and synchronized over Firewire (yes they could do that without a computer as host), otherwise they could only sell one copy of a song to each high school at best. I imagine Verizon doesn't want iPhones using VOIP over 3G either.
I think it's a bad move. 95% of people willing and able to jailbreak an iPhone are also willing and able to pirate apps. All this does is assure that they do. I bet more than half the jailbreakers buy apps legitimately, even those using VOIP over 3G. It's like they're treating a rash by amputating the leg.
File this under fall-out from using real people for quality control. Coincidentally, one of the most beneficial uses of Facebook is those extremely lame quizzes that replace paid census groups.
Beware the lab rat aspect of social networking. It's pretty easy to avoid if you're not an incurable idiot. Sometimes I can't help but be thankful there are so many stupider people out there to determine what's stupid for me. I almost don't need to be smart anymore.
Yes, that was supposed to be creepy and self-deprecating. So is the motivation behind the capitalism of social networking.
Actually the answer is until the RIAA's legal costs cannot result in an effective deterrent to others.
The curious part of the RIAA-slamming campaign is that it actually promotes malicious litigation by the RIAA. If nobody were aware of their legal misdeeds, they wouldn't bother to do them. But since they're well publicized, they're encouraged to be as atrocious as possible to send their "we're going to get you" message to as wide an audience as possible.
The fact is, like it or not, they are incurring annual losses in the 10's of millions, and their campaign of legal harassment is working, thanks largely to blog threads like this. Sometimes injustice is best left unnoticed.
How moot is this argument! We're talking about linux users here. I think they can decide which is right for them and install it themselves. Who cares what comes on the install disc!
So what if some geek listens in on my phone calls as they're recorded by big brother. I'm not dumb enough to say anything I want to keep private over a cel phone anyway. And I'm not even a drug dealer.
He meant it would be Americans manning the phones to field questions from Indians.
Oh I'm sorry, I thought it was "mod opposite" day, when we hand out Insightful mods for being assholes.
I can has unlock iFone?! Can I no givashit too?!
Analog summation requires an analog line running the length of the phone, which cannot be effectively shielded against the massive interference imposed by all digital circuitry, especially the transceiver, since all systems share the same power source and there's no true ground other than the battery's negative terminal.
Digital mixing requires that the microphone output and incoming cellular signal be in sync, either by a master clock to eliminate jitter or by some form of chasing to smooth out jitter, which would introduce significant latency. Both methods will draw on the battery, especially chasing, not to mention the draw from the extra speaker output of two voices rather than one.
In any event, there are no accommodations made for the feedback signal in the ganged chips, so it would require a complete redesign of the input and output chips, and the circuit paths between them.
Also noise reduction is done digitally, so the analog feedback signal will not benefit from it, and you'll be amplifying background noise, plus add the electrical noise, you won't be able to hear the person on the other end except under ideal circumstances. And when a text comes in mid-call - "ECK ECK ECK ECK ECK"
I thought that way once, but I was wrong. With the help of friends and family, I've successfully limited my addictive behavior to days that end in 'y'.
* 1. Lower your voice when taking calls in public.
Agreed. It's much more fun to talk loudly in public when you're faking being on the phone.
* 2. Avoid personal topics when others can hear you.
Definitely more fun when faking, i.e. "They're more like warts, but hairy. What can I do? I've got a date on Friday!"
* 3. Avoid taking calls when you're already engaged in a face-to-face conversation.
Take fake calls when avoiding face-to-face conversations
* 4. If you do take a call, ask permission of the people with you.
"Do you mind if I pretend to take a call to avoid talking to you?"
* 5. Avoid texting during a face-to-face conversations.
Disagree. The fact that you continue the conversation while texting shows true devotion.
* 6. Put your phone's ringer on "silent" in theaters and restaurants.
Unless you have a "fire alarm" ringtone
* 7. Don't light up your phone's screen in a dark theater.
Unless you're substituting it for a cigarette lighter during a romantic power-balad
* 8. Hang up and drive.
Unless you're making an important call and have nowhere to go
* 9. Acknowledge the delay
...........what?
* 10. Don't use Google Voice call screening with family and close friends
Beats telling them up front that you're screwing with them
* 11. Don't blame the other guy for a dropped call
Unless you hung up on purpose
* 12. Avoid looking things up during a conversation
Unless you've got a good vantage point up your co-worker's skirt
* 13. Be mindful about Facebook tagging
Remember the friend's tag goes on the dog's ass, and the dog's ass tag goes on the friend's face
* 14. Avoid inappropriate profile pictures
Only jerk off to the sexy ones
Microphone feedback isn't there because it IS hard. Cel phones can't be nearly so small without ganging several components into one chip. Analog signal from the microphone comes in, and a bandwidth-limited dynamic-expanded noise-reduced data-compressed GSM-encrypted digital signal comes out. Similarly the amplifier to the speaker is ganged to the GSM decoder, data-expander, dynamics-compressor, and DAC. Adding voice feedback means complete chip redesigns.
But wait there's more! If the feedback signal is analog, it will be noisy from the phone's unavoidable massive EM and RF interference. Raise your hand if you've ever heard the "eck eck eck eck eck" noise a cel phone makes over the mic at karaoke. Multiply that by about 100.
If the feedback signal is digital, it will require the whole circuit to be redesigned with a master clock to regulate the timings of digital operations in the various chips since the data flow will be parallel instead of serial. Or you could put memory buffers at all points so the chips can chase each other instead of locking, but then you get latency. Oh wait, I forgot to mention the chips already have integrated buffers... my bad.
Call in the next five minutes and we'll throw in additional battery drain!
And it's not worth making a movie unless it has franchise potential, yeah yeah yeah... The problem isn't the game, it's the players. If they had that approach all along the great movies of the past would have lead to great movie franchises. The problem now is they're making sensationalistic tripe catering to new technologies instead of traditional plot and character development.
Similarly, if you look back, the best playing games (not necessarily the best selling) were made for systems late in their life cycle, after their technical potential had been reached, and there was no new fluff to exploit. Games had to stand on their game play, at least until another console with fancier video processors arrived.
It's not like the best selling movie at the moment is an egregiously sensationalistic rip-off of a simplistic fairy tale or anything.
I felt it too, but it seemed like relief to me. Always emotion the future is.
On the other hand, I bet most people here have Aspergen's to some degree. Raise your hand if you're at all uncomfortable looking people in the eye.
It's not bait and switch if they stop offering a service in favor of suggestive selling. If they claimed they still offered it that would be another thing, but since it came to our attention, obviously they're not hiding it.
How many people buy just the box when they get a computer?
People who are upgrading from an obsolete computer but already have a decent monitor and accessories? Good LCD monitors have been out long enough to outlive a PC's 18-month built-in obsolescence. My monitors turned 4 last month, no desire to replace them yet. And a 4-year-old printer will probably outlast a new disposable one...
Anti-lock brakes work because it doesn't matter what the situation is. Locked brakes are never good.
Wrong. Locked brakes stop cars faster on loose surfaces like gravel roads. Just a few posts above I was complaining about driver education...
And as bad as 3000 deaths a month sounds, the part of that sample you don't mention are the number of people who go from point A to point B each day unscathed. Looked at that way, cars seem downright safe compared to say, being shot at in Afghanistan.
That comparison is almost as dumb as the fact that more people have died in car accidents in the US since 1940 than all American wars combined. What makes my comparison creepy is that it's actually part of an official USMC recruitment speech. My problem is that I, as an educated driver, am just as likely to be hit by a bad driver as a bad driver is. I'd much rather people learned how to drive better than learned stupid comparisons suggesting they don't need to learn to drive better.
And actually speeding isn't as much a problem as a wide difference in speeds between drivers on the same road. Everyone doing 20% over the limit is safer than some doing the limit and others doing 20% over. Speed limits should be very strictly enforced and vary depending on the conditions too.
One great use for in-car communications is highway information. That way the speed limit could be changed at any time and drivers kept informed. The car's computer could indicate if you're over the limit, without ratting you out, however the transponders at every on-ramp and off-ramp will be tricky to fool. If you get from ramp A to ramp B in less time than it would take doing the legal limit, expect a warning or fine in the mail.
The odd thing is that many toll roads record the incoming and outgoing times without the information being used to catch speeders. That really stumps me.
Fixed the subject heading for you. There is only one cause for every vehicle collision on the road: DRIVER ERROR. (note I said vehicle collision, not deer collision for example)
Everything you've suggested is just padding. The more padding you put on a football player, the harder they hit. The safer the cars, the less drivers concern themselves with safe driving.
For example, who here routinely keeps their blind spots clear? If you don't, remember to tell the officer "the other car came out of NOWHERE!" But you've never been in a serious accident, so you must be a good driver, right? Just like everyone else who gets into serious accidents...
As for your swerving safety mechanisms, a good driver would disable them rather than surrender control of their vehicle. It wouldn't be long before some assholes start selling dog collars with those RF chips to keep dogs (which their owners irresponsibly let run on the roads) from being run over. Most of the time it is better to run over a small animal rather than risk losing control of the vehicle. Meanwhile many cars don't allow for their anti-lock brakes to be disabled, even though it's better to disable anti-lock brakes on gravel roads. Handing over control to technology can only be effective if absolutely every vehicle on the road is fully controlled by a unified system.
The investment you mention should be spent on driver training and higher license requirements. The more technology goes into cars, the more drivers need to know to operate the vehicle responsibly. Driver education is already well behind the technological advances, and the longer people survive their poor driving habits, the harder it is to teach them they're wrong.
5W internally can kill, but the likelihood of accidentally generating 5W internally from a 5W induction mat is below negligible. Keep in mind they use much more powerful induction mats (aka induction stoves) at chain restaurants like Boston Pizza, where the intelligence of the cooks can rival infants.
There's an app for that.
This is how it should be:
Two batteries, one in use, one always either charging or charged.
Batteries are easily swapped.
The devices have a small built-in battery or capacitor allowing for 30 seconds of idle operation without battery so reboot isn't necessary during battery swap.
The charger has many pins to accomodate a wide variety of batteries, and can auto-sense battery type and pin polarity (unless the battery has abslutely no charge, rare).
Battery chargers are easier and cheaper than robust mini power jacks and on-board charging circuitry. The reboot part is the main reason cameras use battery chargers and cel phones use power adapters.
What other storage medium has been crippled for the convenience of being able to sell *exactly* the same chip/disk at different capacities with very different prices?
Good ole 5.25" floppy disks were available single-sided, with a notch on one side to tell the drive it was writable, or more expensive double-sided with notches on both sides. Cut an extra notch on a single-sided disk and you could write to both sides.
Now that's a hack! ...get it?
What was really weird was that certain C64 games could not be copied onto cheaper media, you needed the r33ty BASF disks for the good filez. There's a backwards example, same capacity and format, but held more valuable data...