It isn't a misunderstanding of your words, I was trying to explain how science works at a level you might understand. I am wondering if you noticed the user ID numbers of the people trying to explain why you are wrong.... I wonder what that might indicate?
You are a caveman who finds two rocks that seem to stick together when they touch each other. This seems strange so you decide to see what might make this happen. Your first idea is there is tree sap on the rocks making them sticky so you wash the rocks off in the stream, but the rocks still stick together. Then you decide that the sun or the wind must be making the rocks stick together so you go into the darkest cave you can find. The rocks still stick together, and you go tell your best friend Ooge about the rocks. Ooge says did you try washing the rocks? And you say yes Ooge I am not an idiot. So now you have eliminated all the ways you know that would make the rocks stick together, but you don't know why they stick together. Since you are a scientist caveman you won't say it is magic you just write what you measured on the cave wall next to your pictures of the animals and go work on Ooge's banging rocks together to make fire theory. Later on we figure out it was magnetism and Ooge wins the noble prize for fire.
Things become much more complicated then first impression when you try to really explain something. For example I went to a football game with a group of Chinese grad students and they asked me how a team can score points. I thought to myself this is easy, and began to explain the rules.
1. Touchdowns are worth 7 points... err they are worth 6 points technically 2. After a touchdown the scoring team can decide to kick the ball through the uprights for 1 point Or 3. The scoring team can decide to run another regular play and if they enter the end-zone again on that 1 play they get 2 points. 4. Fields goals are 3 points and are scored when the team on offense can kick the ball through the uprights. 5. The defense can score points if they can tackle an offensive player in the end-zone while they are holding the football. The defensive team then gets 2 points and gets the ball kicked to them on the following play instead of the normal system where the scoring team kicks the ball to the other team. 6. If the defense can steal the ball and run into the end-zone they are facing then it is a touchdown and rule 2 and 3 apply.
By the end of this discussion they were more confused then when we started. So when you say how hard can it be to explain how to store a file questions like.
1. How to delete? 2. How to rename? 3. How to create folders or other organizational structures? 4. How to move items between organizational structures? 5. How to copy an item already in storage? 6. How to download multiple files? 7. Can security be set or changed? 8. Oh yeah and how to I upload a file in the first place?
The more precision you apply to a discussion the more complicated they tend to get. Just like a touchdown is 7 points is easier to understand, upload a file is easy too.
Apple wants it's products to be unique and have different capabilities compared to other companies products. In fact Apple is famous for having unique features and exploiting that fact till the competition catches up. If Apple spends tons of money making a new feature for the iPhone or iPad like a new hardware 3D accelerator and release it to their developer community, they would want to see this special ability used in the software created for their product. If a significant portion of the developer community uses Flash or a Flash translation layer to make their programs , then Apple is at the whims of Adobe if they decide to support the new feature. Adobe might say hmmm only the new iPhone ultra 2000 has the 3D accelerator system, and it would cost us money to develop for it, but the majority of phones do not have this feature we should probably just skip it. Then when consumers compare the new Android phone and the new iPhone they will say "hey these things work exactly the same for the programs I want to run" This might be good for Adobe, and the cheaper non-3D accelerated phones, but it would be devastating for Apple. You do not want your developers coding to the lowest common denominator in terms of functionality and features. You want the developer to exploit your strengths in the products they make.
I read an article discussing the future of on-demand cable programming and the future of commercials. The article stated that on a regular TV show (IE NOT the super bowl, or big event etc..) the average was 1 penny per viewer per commercial based on the Neilson ratings. If the average TV show has 24-30 commercials per hour show and my wife and I watch the show together then we are looking at about 60 cents per show the producing channel makes in profits. I am very keen on the idea of paying 60 cents per show to never see another commercial, if the TV companies get the money they want, and I get the show sans commercials I want, it is a win-win unless you are a advertiser. $2.00 for a show at iTunes resolution is not a great deal, but if cable companies or iTunes step-up and tell ABC that they will charge a rate closer to the advertising rate then people would swarm to it. I am not suggesting they force payments on every viewer, but if they had a on-demand system or web system that let me purchase shows without commercials I could decide if I wanted to watch Free-ABC or Commercial-Free-ABC.
Yeah, I have both the n50 and the n52. I really like the enhancements made by the n52, but you are right in regard to the button quality. The n52's buttons seem sticky, and are not nearly as free moving as the n50. I have found that this has gotten better over the last 3 or 4 months of using it, but it still isn't as smooth as the original. Hopefully when the next model comes out they will have fixed this flaw. I really recommend these items for people who play allot of FPS games.
1. Tell Starbuck's that the Martian Coffee market is untapped. 2. Tell them the best location for coffee sales is the landing site of the Beagle 2 3. Wait the 2 weeks for them to build the store 4. Order a tall latte and 1 hour of wi-fi 5. Connect to the beagle 2 using your local wi-fi 6. Drink your latte
This would cost the EU goverments about $7 (for the latte and 1 hour wi-fi) and they get a latte out of the deal!
Papyrus used the GPL (Grand Prix Legends) engine in thier newer Nascar 4 racing game. The physics engine is even more refined, and the game takes into account the heat of the tires and the aerodynamics of cars being close to you. All in all it is a very good simulation of a car going in circles at 190+ MPH. As machines get faster and faster more and more of the "static" or aproximated calculations will be replaced by "real" calculations in real time. This will allow games (especially ones that use well known physics, like cars and planes) to be modeled extremly closely. If Intel and AMD are right, and we will be seeing 15+ gHz computers by 2006, I can only imagine how realistic a quad processor 15 gHz machine would be able to simulate a race car. Heck you might even need an airbag on your computer;)
I run a large imaging operation, and we are also looking into DVD as a storage medium, the problems is the equipment just isn't available yet. My suggestion is to look into getting a HP Surestore Optical Jukebox system. These systems use SCSI interfaces to a jukebox that has a maximum capacity of 238 discs. Currently each disk can hold 5.2 GB making a total storage capacity of 1.2 TB. I have also heard rumors that the 10.4 GB disks will be available. The benefit of this system is it uses standard SCSI connections, has a standard disk access system (with API) and is not bleeding edge. Take a look at HP's website and see if they fit your requirements. Spacecase
WorldCom has already demonstrated a 1.6 Tbps system using 160 10 Gbps channels over one piece of glass. The system uses Dense-Wavelength Division Multiplexing to pack the 160 channels on the fibre. 40 Gbps is faster for 1:1 computer transfers, but this system could in theory give 160 nodes full 10 Gbps access without having any interaction with the other channels.
This is like having the choice of a 10-BaseT switch or a 100-BaseT Hub. take a look at the article
1. WorldCom bought UUNET over 3 years ago. You may have noticed that the official UUNET logo says UUNet a WorldCom company.
2. WorldCom purchased MCI about a year and a half ago. The company changed it's name to MCIWorldCom.
3. About 9 months ago the Sprint deal was announced and MCI WorldCom also announced that the name of the company would revert to WorldCom so as not to show favoritism to MCI over Sprint or any of the smaller companies that WorldCom now owns.
4.The EU has already announced that it feels the WorldCom Sprint Merger would be bad, but they have not made a ruling.
I agree that the phone companies own a majority of the Internet backbone systems and even though POTS is going away a billing model for packet traffic will replace it to balance the revenue streams of these large and powerful companies. The days of buy a pipe and send as much data as you want are going to slowly go away, or the pipes are going to get more expensive.
When my university went to the regional programming tourney, MS was sponsering it. This meant you had to run on a MS OS and use MS tools. The team tried to use the MS Pascal compiler but it was full of bugs and very very old (does MS still sell a Pascal compiler?)The judges would not allow any othe compilers and the team had to switch to C and they were dead. (The first 2 years of CS at my school used to be Pascal, so it was a natural choice for a mixed team or sophmores/Juniors/Seniors) I do not know if MS is still sponsering the events, or if they still mandate the use of thier software. Spacecase
One of the security loopholes that could be used to undo any encryption technology for DVD-Audio is the simple fact that the sound must be played through a audio device ( ie soundcard). It occurs to me that it would not be that difficult to create a device driver for a soundcard that wrote any digital information it was sent to a disk file. You could play the disk through a standard legal software player and make a digital copy of the decoded bitstream without having to hack the disc itself. This technique could also be applied to a physical player if you put vampire wires on the motherboard before the A/D chip. This idea would not prevent watermarking technologies from tracking the information, but most audiophiles are against any system that would degrade the quality, which watermarking by definition must do. In any event it is impossible for the entertainment industry to stop the duplication of thier data, and I think they should push for a pricing structure that would make pirating less interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't a misunderstanding of your words, I was trying to explain how science works at a level you might understand. I am wondering if you noticed the user ID numbers of the people trying to explain why you are wrong.... I wonder what that might indicate?
Ok here is the situation.
You are a caveman who finds two rocks that seem to stick together when they touch each other. This seems strange so you decide to see what might make this happen. Your first idea is there is tree sap on the rocks making them sticky so you wash the rocks off in the stream, but the rocks still stick together. Then you decide that the sun or the wind must be making the rocks stick together so you go into the darkest cave you can find. The rocks still stick together, and you go tell your best friend Ooge about the rocks. Ooge says did you try washing the rocks? And you say yes Ooge I am not an idiot. So now you have eliminated all the ways you know that would make the rocks stick together, but you don't know why they stick together. Since you are a scientist caveman you won't say it is magic you just write what you measured on the cave wall next to your pictures of the animals and go work on Ooge's banging rocks together to make fire theory. Later on we figure out it was magnetism and Ooge wins the noble prize for fire.
Things become much more complicated then first impression when you try to really explain something. For example I went to a football game with a group of Chinese grad students and they asked me how a team can score points. I thought to myself this is easy, and began to explain the rules.
1. Touchdowns are worth 7 points... err they are worth 6 points technically
2. After a touchdown the scoring team can decide to kick the ball through the uprights for 1 point
Or
3. The scoring team can decide to run another regular play and if they enter the end-zone again on that 1 play they get 2 points.
4. Fields goals are 3 points and are scored when the team on offense can kick the ball through the uprights.
5. The defense can score points if they can tackle an offensive player in the end-zone while they are holding the football. The defensive team then gets 2 points and gets the ball kicked to them on the following play instead of the normal system where the scoring team kicks the ball to the other team.
6. If the defense can steal the ball and run into the end-zone they are facing then it is a touchdown and rule 2 and 3 apply.
By the end of this discussion they were more confused then when we started. So when you say how hard can it be to explain how to store a file questions like.
1. How to delete?
2. How to rename?
3. How to create folders or other organizational structures?
4. How to move items between organizational structures?
5. How to copy an item already in storage?
6. How to download multiple files?
7. Can security be set or changed?
8. Oh yeah and how to I upload a file in the first place?
The more precision you apply to a discussion the more complicated they tend to get. Just like a touchdown is 7 points is easier to understand, upload a file is easy too.
Apple wants it's products to be unique and have different capabilities compared to other companies products. In fact Apple is famous for having unique features and exploiting that fact till the competition catches up. If Apple spends tons of money making a new feature for the iPhone or iPad like a new hardware 3D accelerator and release it to their developer community, they would want to see this special ability used in the software created for their product. If a significant portion of the developer community uses Flash or a Flash translation layer to make their programs , then Apple is at the whims of Adobe if they decide to support the new feature. Adobe might say hmmm only the new iPhone ultra 2000 has the 3D accelerator system, and it would cost us money to develop for it, but the majority of phones do not have this feature we should probably just skip it. Then when consumers compare the new Android phone and the new iPhone they will say "hey these things work exactly the same for the programs I want to run" This might be good for Adobe, and the cheaper non-3D accelerated phones, but it would be devastating for Apple. You do not want your developers coding to the lowest common denominator in terms of functionality and features. You want the developer to exploit your strengths in the products they make.
Spacecase
I read an article discussing the future of on-demand cable programming and the future of commercials. The article stated that on a regular TV show (IE NOT the super bowl, or big event etc..) the average was 1 penny per viewer per commercial based on the Neilson ratings. If the average TV show has 24-30 commercials per hour show and my wife and I watch the show together then we are looking at about 60 cents per show the producing channel makes in profits. I am very keen on the idea of paying 60 cents per show to never see another commercial, if the TV companies get the money they want, and I get the show sans commercials I want, it is a win-win unless you are a advertiser. $2.00 for a show at iTunes resolution is not a great deal, but if cable companies or iTunes step-up and tell ABC that they will charge a rate closer to the advertising rate then people would swarm to it. I am not suggesting they force payments on every viewer, but if they had a on-demand system or web system that let me purchase shows without commercials I could decide if I wanted to watch Free-ABC or Commercial-Free-ABC.
Just my 2 commercials worth of ideas.
Spacecase
Yeah, I have both the n50 and the n52. I really like the enhancements made by the n52, but you are right in regard to the button quality. The n52's buttons seem sticky, and are not nearly as free moving as the n50. I have found that this has gotten better over the last 3 or 4 months of using it, but it still isn't as smooth as the original. Hopefully when the next model comes out they will have fixed this flaw. I really recommend these items for people who play allot of FPS games.
Spacecase
1. Tell Starbuck's that the Martian Coffee market is untapped.
2. Tell them the best location for coffee sales is the landing site of the Beagle 2
3. Wait the 2 weeks for them to build the store
4. Order a tall latte and 1 hour of wi-fi
5. Connect to the beagle 2 using your local wi-fi
6. Drink your latte
This would cost the EU goverments about $7 (for the latte and 1 hour wi-fi) and they get a latte out of the deal!
Slashdot: Where nerds do IT best.
Papyrus used the GPL (Grand Prix Legends) engine in thier newer Nascar 4 racing game. The physics engine is even more refined, and the game takes into account the heat of the tires and the aerodynamics of cars being close to you. All in all it is a very good simulation of a car going in circles at 190+ MPH. As machines get faster and faster more and more of the "static" or aproximated calculations will be replaced by "real" calculations in real time. This will allow games (especially ones that use well known physics, like cars and planes) to be modeled extremly closely. If Intel and AMD are right, and we will be seeing 15+ gHz computers by 2006, I can only imagine how realistic a quad processor 15 gHz machine would be able to simulate a race car. Heck you might even need an airbag on your computer ;)
Spacecase
I run a large imaging operation, and we are also looking into DVD as a storage medium, the problems is the equipment just isn't available yet. My suggestion is to look into getting a HP Surestore Optical Jukebox system. These systems use SCSI interfaces to a jukebox that has a maximum capacity of 238 discs. Currently each disk can hold 5.2 GB making a total storage capacity of 1.2 TB. I have also heard rumors that the 10.4 GB disks will be available. The benefit of this system is it uses standard SCSI connections, has a standard disk access system (with API) and is not bleeding edge. Take a look at HP's website and see if they fit your requirements. Spacecase
This is like having the choice of a 10-BaseT switch or a 100-BaseT Hub. take a look at the article
Yahoo News
Spacecase
1. WorldCom bought UUNET over 3 years ago. You may have noticed that the official UUNET logo says UUNet a WorldCom company.
2. WorldCom purchased MCI about a year and a half ago. The company changed it's name to MCIWorldCom.
3. About 9 months ago the Sprint deal was announced and MCI WorldCom also announced that the name of the company would revert to WorldCom so as not to show favoritism to MCI over Sprint or any of the smaller companies that WorldCom now owns.
4.The EU has already announced that it feels the WorldCom Sprint Merger would be bad, but they have not made a ruling.
I agree that the phone companies own a majority of the Internet backbone systems and even though POTS is going away a billing model for packet traffic will replace it to balance the revenue streams of these large and powerful companies. The days of buy a pipe and send as much data as you want are going to slowly go away, or the pipes are going to get more expensive.
Spacecase
When my university went to the regional programming tourney, MS was sponsering it. This meant you had to run on a MS OS and use MS tools. The team tried to use the MS Pascal compiler but it was full of bugs and very very old (does MS still sell a Pascal compiler?)The judges would not allow any othe compilers and the team had to switch to C and they were dead. (The first 2 years of CS at my school used to be Pascal, so it was a natural choice for a mixed team or sophmores/Juniors/Seniors) I do not know if MS is still sponsering the events, or if they still mandate the use of thier software. Spacecase
One of the security loopholes that could be used to undo any encryption technology for DVD-Audio is the simple fact that the sound must be played through a audio device ( ie soundcard). It occurs to me that it would not be that difficult to create a device driver for a soundcard that wrote any digital information it was sent to a disk file. You could play the disk through a standard legal software player and make a digital copy of the decoded bitstream without having to hack the disc itself. This technique could also be applied to a physical player if you put vampire wires on the motherboard before the A/D chip. This idea would not prevent watermarking technologies from tracking the information, but most audiophiles are against any system that would degrade the quality, which watermarking by definition must do. In any event it is impossible for the entertainment industry to stop the duplication of thier data, and I think they should push for a pricing structure that would make pirating less interesting.