Einstein Express: "For when it absolutely, positively has to be there the day before yesterday".
and then they proceed to show workers back-dating it and then beating the crap out of the package, while stamping with the postmark of four third-world countries or something.
These are just the PC markets' answer to the iMac type customers.
It's not supposed to be portable. It's to serve the people out there who don't want to deal wire wires or don't have the space in/on their desk for a full tower etc. But they want desktop performance.
They don't need it to travel with, but being able to move it around the house might be nice. Or they move frequently and don't want to deal with taking the thing apart and putting it back together each time (My desktop sure is a bitch to move.)
Now the label is suing Apple for a song that wasn't legally copyrighted until long after that commercial was run on MTV. Its a ploy to get his name in the papers and keep it there.
Legally copyrighted? Eminem owned the copyright to any lyrics or music he created the moment its was created. (See Copyright.gov if you want more details.)
I have no idea what the facts of the case are, but Apple should take a beating if things are as alleged. If some Apple (read: corporate behemoth ) decides it can just use any copyrighted work it wants to in its advertisements without permission then the games over.
This isn't a little fair use that I want to copy my CD as a backup or to store in my car. Or even use if for a home movie. Apple (it is alleged) was trying to profit off of Eminem's work without Eminems permission or blessing and without reimbursing Eminem.
I like how you didn't even realize they converted the costs to American dollars as well. The nerve of these people.
I'd suggest you take a look at who wrote the story. It's written by the Associated Press (an American organization) that has a very set style for how it refers to distances. The AP is going to default to miles because Americans (there readers) have a better idea of the distance of a kilometer than a mile.
We too have run our fair share of iPod-centric headlines--for a good reason. The iPod is the most popular MP3 player in the world, and it still makes other players look and feel inelegant in comparison.
Don't get me wrong; it's still our favorite overall MP3 player. Although everyone can think of reasons why they want an iPod, I've decided to use this column to list a few reasons why not to buy one.
Yeah, boy, they were really harsh and unfair. I own an iPod. I love my iPod. I take it with me everywhere. That doesn't mean it couldn't be better.
The iPod 3.0's battery life could stand a bit of improvement. It does skip --especially if the batter is low-- when jogging (meaning I have to hold it in my hand, not on my "belt" loop). It was expensive (albiet also a steal) and it doesn't come with a Mic or an FM radio (i'd like both, but the last thing I want are two accessories). Oh and don't think I don't worry that Apple (and it's uber control tendencies) wants to control WHO I can buy music from through at least this next generation of music technology.
Odd, considering a tornado is likely to take down telephone polls across a wide area, but will only rarely strike a tower. And the mobile phone can come with you anywhere you want.
Yes, 100,000 folks showoing up for a football game can throw off some areas, but I find this pretty rare. At least in locations that are used to big crowds.
Oh and the cell phone providers are phasing the ability to locate a cell phone during emergencies. In my part of my county, it's already in place.
I have a landline, because I have roommates and it's cheap that way, but if I lived by myself I'd drop the landline in a second.
The author truly is on to something here, despite the slashdot masses feeling that computer languages should be something of the few.
I can disagree with you because I'm someone who doesn't know how to program. I have no desire to be able to build complex applications, but I also am "literate" enough to identify tasks that computers can do much better than I can-at a press of a button. Perhaps check a web site to see if it has changed. Maybe parse out data from 10 web sites and display it in a spreadsheet. Something that theoretically should not be difficult, but because of the OS constructs we live in, not something easy to do.
The metaphor of literacy is a powerful one. We don't need to teach everyone to read and write so we can all write a great novel. We need to teach everyone to read and write because they need to be able to remember to pickup milk, eggs and sugar when they go to the market.
As someone who is uses a computer in my job, I do often run into repetive small tasks that could be done quickly if I had the expertise to take 20 minutes and write out some simple constructions. But as I said, I can't program.
There are a number of barriers. One is, well what language should I learn. Most languages are to build applications. Not to do mirror tasks I myself do. Not to quickly analyze a bit of data I pulled off the web. The other, is it's a lot of work at this point to learn such a language--current OS's are not designed to make it easy to be user-programmable.
Part of the problem is our reliance on GUI. NOT because computers don't understand GUI interfaces, but because humans don't communicate very well via GUI. GUI's make it difficult for me to tell my computer to do anything that was not planned for by the creator of the OS and application. (I can make my computer do more "for me" with a DOS batch file than I can in Windows XP)
And the current trends in programing are aimed at turning the home computer into an appliance. And an appliance, by definition, has only a certain limited number of tasks and is built with the idea to remain flexible--to be able to do a number of tasks.
But as we know, the abilities of computers are really only limited by our own creativity.
Sadly, the slashdot masses miss the boat. They throw in cliche's that users of car's don't need to know how to rebuild a transmission. This is true. What they miss is that the article is saying that programmers haven't built users a very good steering wheel yet--and it's getting worse.
If we keep going down this line, the car will only go straight because, afterall, that's the way you're going most of the time.
"I have not seen anything like it in my entire career as a solar physicist. The probability of this happening is so low that it is a statistical anomaly."
This week's quote:
"The probability of this happening is a double secret statistical anomaly."
This illustrates the level to which our legal system has sunk.
From my knowledge of the founding fathers and our legal system as it was meant to be: private citizens are given rights. They can bring suits in court or have suits brought against them to preserve public order. Television shows, and more generally, companies are not, I repeat, NOT citizens!
That's foolishness. It's not a "TV Show" it's the people who own a TV show who are [thoeretically] suing because other people who caused damages to their tv show.
The whole point of there being a legal definition of "corporation" is that it takes on the identity of a person and has a legal right in a limited sense. And there were corporations in the founding father's times.
Definition Care of M-W.com
Main Entry: corporation
Function: noun Date: 15th century 2 : a body formed and authorized by law to act as a single person although constituted by one or more persons and legally endowed with various rights and duties including the capacity of succession
I always find it interesting when Slashdot links to everyone, but the actual source. The Washington Post, which broke the story has an article as well as a followup on how the ISS crew reacted to the news. The reporter also gave an interview.
After all, if someone is near enough that it's a local call, and I need to talk to them, it's far more sociable to just go round there and see them, or meet them in the pub.
Just FYI, local calls generally cover an area that would take a couple hours to drive across . In less populated states (a lot of them;-) ), they can be close to the entire state.
It's really not that ridiculous (although it's getting more so as cell phone costs drop).
But when cell phones came out they were very expensive and used only by rich folks who wanted to be able to make and recieve calls on the go. But it would have been unwieldy to have someone using their regular phone (perhaps even a local call, which are one price fits all/not metered in the U.S.) pay the outrageous fees to contact the owner of the mobile phone. (And *someone* has to pay the costs of that conversation)
Cell phones were then percieved as an additional cost over the baseline of a regular phone call.
It's somewhat of an anachronism now, because cell phone costs are competitive with -- if not cheaper than -- landline phones. However, since the U.S. still has unmetered local calling, it would still cause problems. Say I'm some teenage girl. I could spend 3 hours a night talking to my friends on their cell phones from my local phone. If *I* don't pay to call and *they* don't pay to recieve the system gets out of wack.
We could get rid that local service plan, but it's pretty popular here. Plus, that's why the internet took off so quickly in the U.S. Folks could call to their ISP for no charge. Of course, now, because of that, we're behind in broadband.
Uh, I read The Washington Post and don't have much trouble finding out about it. They've also had a bunch of editorials etc.
The Post also did a nice big fast A1 lead story on its own poll finding that the majority of Americans don't support gay unions.
This despite that the Post as an employer is gay friendly, is in a gay-friendly city and is gay friendly editorial-wise.
Heheh I read your blog for a second too. Calling America's liberal's "socialists" just shows you have no idea what you're talking about. This country, including most "liberals" balk at even the most minor shifts towards "social democratic" type of institutions, which are a far cry from socialism.
Anyway, you outweigh the liklihood and support of the FMA.
That is because the people who published the PDF were idiots.
And that makes you an idiot?
Yes, we were idiots. I work for the Post in a limited degree and we now have a sheet of paper on a quite visible bulletin board describing how we were idiots.
The.com folks who would post such a document are well aware to checkout if blacking it out was done correctly....now.
Now what does MSNBC need with that information, in relation to your experiences with spam? Seems fishy to me...
Well, if they want to do a story on them, they might actually want to be able to CONTACT you. And let's hope that major news organizations require that people who report things to them are actually, REAL PEOPLE. Not just random e-mail addresses signed by Haha G. Ottcha
Because I can't code. I find writing definitions hard and my day job involves sitting at a desk, so I'd probably find digging a well pretty taxing on my muscles.
Should I build my own computer? Perhaps I should create my own chips with open-sourced schematics. (Add sand, aluminum, other hazardous chemicals, microwave on medium for 5 minutes. Viola!)...I like my job and career, but I work to get money to buy things I want and need. Otherwise I'd just spend it sitting at the beach--at least a good bit more of it. That's why people invented money, because it provides the most efficient way to trade skills.
If my neighbor wants to come over and DIG MY WELL FOR ME ala Linus, than great. If it gives me clean water, we're set. But, I'm looking out my window right now and I don't see any movement.
Yes, they will when they have to. When they start logging on to sites that just arn't there anymore.
Now, I'm not going to pay for general news today. I can get it at the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, MSNBC, LA Times etc. etc. etc. I'd pay if they all dissapeared, but they won't.
NYTimes is profitable. The Washington Post's website is it's only real national edition and too strategically important. Others are similarly situated almost all are heading towards profitability. The WSJ is pay only and profitable. Salon is... well it just doesn't die;-).
But, you know what, I've put some bucks into political blogs I read to keep them moderately healthy. I'd hate to see them go and -- more importantly -- I'd pay a moderate fee if they went pay-per-view.
The New Republic went mostly pay-per-view a couple months back. It gave me the little push I needed to subscribe to the deadtree version, which gives access to articles online.
And I subscribe to ArsTech's forums, since I habitate there fairly often and I want to help keep that site alive.
Finally, I work at a company that publishes $1,000/year newsletters via the internet. (Granted its PDF, not HTML) It content and people certainly pay, even if it isn't the general public.
Yes, I'm ahead of the curve. I'm obviously willing to pay for pulp-based content as well, which many aren't even willing to do.
For those stuck in 2001, believing you are the only one who "get's it" that the 90s were irrational exuberence and everything dotcom was dumb: Get off your high horse. Everyone knows, even those in business and things are improving. Profits are being squeezed out--even in the crappy economic times.
The internet is just a different way to transmit information. There is nothing inherent about it that means people won't pay for entertainment and valuable information there.
The copyright law needs to revert back to the 14-year limit, with certain circumstances making that time frames SHORTER
Prepare to see all SORTS of artists going even more starving. I'm an aspiring photojournalist. Guess what all the folks who made it tell me. If you're great, it takes 5 years to build an archive of shots that is going to be able to moderately support you and allow you to start paying off your debts. It's copyright that gives a photographer that ability. If 9 years later those images that I took go into the public domain, I will be forever working to maintain a barely-decent level of income.
If *I* make it, I get to control it until my death. Period.
If I take a photograph and post it on my web site for people to see for free, I don't want to see it end up in a commercial tomorrow. Copyright is the only thing protecting me from that.
Life + 90 years is not reasonable, I don't see why my great grandkids should profit from my work, but neither is 14 years.
I'm coming to this "discussion" a bit late so it's not likely I'll be noticed, but the attitude of readers here is truly ignorant.
YES Microsoft owns a share of MSNBC, but that does not mean that it taints ever single article. MSNBC has shown it is more than willing to post articles that are not favorable to the company. And Slate, which this was written on, is a RESPECTED NEWS ZINE. To throw that "value" away by writing a "biased," yet POSITIVE article on google is ludicrious.
To believe that behemoth corporations are hive minds that are solely focused on certain goals throughout their structure is just ignorant.
Trust me, Gates had nothing to do with this article.
Friggin read it.
It's headlined "Digging for Googleholes: Google may be our new god, but it's not omnipotent."
Did anyone actually bother to interpret that. It says that Google isn't perfect, but it's cleary the BEST. That's what's written between every line. "Google is magnificent, but it could be better". If that's an advertisement for MSN search, then Microsoft's got some more serious problems.
Slashdot Mirror
The U.S. did not withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol... it never agreed to abide by it.
do you have one documented iPod death due to jogging?. Yeah, I haven't heard of one either.
Einstein Express: "For when it absolutely, positively has to be there the day before yesterday".
and then they proceed to show workers back-dating it and then beating the crap out of the package, while stamping with the postmark of four third-world countries or something.
These are just the PC markets' answer to the iMac type customers.
It's not supposed to be portable. It's to serve the people out there who don't want to deal wire wires or don't have the space in/on their desk for a full tower etc. But they want desktop performance.
They don't need it to travel with, but being able to move it around the house might be nice. Or they move frequently and don't want to deal with taking the thing apart and putting it back together each time (My desktop sure is a bitch to move.)
Now the label is suing Apple for a song that wasn't legally copyrighted until long after that commercial was run on MTV. Its a ploy to get his name in the papers and keep it there.
Legally copyrighted? Eminem owned the copyright to any lyrics or music he created the moment its was created. (See Copyright.gov if you want more details.)
I have no idea what the facts of the case are, but Apple should take a beating if things are as alleged. If some Apple (read: corporate behemoth ) decides it can just use any copyrighted work it wants to in its advertisements without permission then the games over.
This isn't a little fair use that I want to copy my CD as a backup or to store in my car. Or even use if for a home movie. Apple (it is alleged) was trying to profit off of Eminem's work without Eminems permission or blessing and without reimbursing Eminem.
That's the most compelling reason for copyright.
I like how you didn't even realize they converted the costs to American dollars as well. The nerve of these people.
I'd suggest you take a look at who wrote the story. It's written by the Associated Press (an American organization) that has a very set style for how it refers to distances. The AP is going to default to miles because Americans (there readers) have a better idea of the distance of a kilometer than a mile.
Just go buy a 2 or 4 gig Compact Flash card.
;-).
They read/write significantly faster and have no moving parts. They're also removable etc. etc
Ok, so the 4 Gigger is a bit pricey
Yeah, boy, they were really harsh and unfair. I own an iPod. I love my iPod. I take it with me everywhere. That doesn't mean it couldn't be better.
The iPod 3.0's battery life could stand a bit of improvement. It does skip --especially if the batter is low-- when jogging (meaning I have to hold it in my hand, not on my "belt" loop). It was expensive (albiet also a steal) and it doesn't come with a Mic or an FM radio (i'd like both, but the last thing I want are two accessories). Oh and don't think I don't worry that Apple (and it's uber control tendencies) wants to control WHO I can buy music from through at least this next generation of music technology.
Odd, considering a tornado is likely to take down telephone polls across a wide area, but will only rarely strike a tower. And the mobile phone can come with you anywhere you want.
Yes, 100,000 folks showoing up for a football game can throw off some areas, but I find this pretty rare. At least in locations that are used to big crowds.
Oh and the cell phone providers are phasing the ability to locate a cell phone during emergencies. In my part of my county, it's already in place.
I have a landline, because I have roommates and it's cheap that way, but if I lived by myself I'd drop the landline in a second.
The author truly is on to something here, despite the slashdot masses feeling that computer languages should be something of the few.
I can disagree with you because I'm someone who doesn't know how to program. I have no desire to be able to build complex applications, but I also am "literate" enough to identify tasks that computers can do much better than I can-at a press of a button. Perhaps check a web site to see if it has changed. Maybe parse out data from 10 web sites and display it in a spreadsheet. Something that theoretically should not be difficult, but because of the OS constructs we live in, not something easy to do.
The metaphor of literacy is a powerful one. We don't need to teach everyone to read and write so we can all write a great novel. We need to teach everyone to read and write because they need to be able to remember to pickup milk, eggs and sugar when they go to the market.
As someone who is uses a computer in my job, I do often run into repetive small tasks that could be done quickly if I had the expertise to take 20 minutes and write out some simple constructions. But as I said, I can't program.
There are a number of barriers. One is, well what language should I learn. Most languages are to build applications. Not to do mirror tasks I myself do. Not to quickly analyze a bit of data I pulled off the web. The other, is it's a lot of work at this point to learn such a language--current OS's are not designed to make it easy to be user-programmable.
Part of the problem is our reliance on GUI. NOT because computers don't understand GUI interfaces, but because humans don't communicate very well via GUI. GUI's make it difficult for me to tell my computer to do anything that was not planned for by the creator of the OS and application. (I can make my computer do more "for me" with a DOS batch file than I can in Windows XP)
And the current trends in programing are aimed at turning the home computer into an appliance. And an appliance, by definition, has only a certain limited number of tasks and is built with the idea to remain flexible--to be able to do a number of tasks.
But as we know, the abilities of computers are really only limited by our own creativity.
Sadly, the slashdot masses miss the boat. They throw in cliche's that users of car's don't need to know how to rebuild a transmission. This is true. What they miss is that the article is saying that programmers haven't built users a very good steering wheel yet--and it's getting worse.
If we keep going down this line, the car will only go straight because, afterall, that's the way you're going most of the time.
From my knowledge of the founding fathers and our legal system as it was meant to be: private citizens are given rights. They can bring suits in court or have suits brought against them to preserve public order. Television shows, and more generally, companies are not, I repeat, NOT citizens!
That's foolishness. It's not a "TV Show" it's the people who own a TV show who are [thoeretically] suing because other people who caused damages to their tv show.
The whole point of there being a legal definition of "corporation" is that it takes on the identity of a person and has a legal right in a limited sense. And there were corporations in the founding father's times.
Definition Care of M-W.com
AOL software changes computer settings!
I think it's fair to say 99.9% of AOL customers will be happy with such a move. They should, however, explain what they are doing.
I always find it interesting when Slashdot links to everyone, but the actual source. The Washington Post, which broke the story has an article as well as a followup on how the ISS crew reacted to the news. The reporter also gave an interview.
After all, if someone is near enough that it's a local call, and I need to talk to them, it's far more sociable to just go round there and see them, or meet them in the pub.
;-) ), they can be close to the entire state.
Just FYI, local calls generally cover an area that would take a couple hours to drive across . In less populated states (a lot of them
It's really not that ridiculous (although it's getting more so as cell phone costs drop).
But when cell phones came out they were very expensive and used only by rich folks who wanted to be able to make and recieve calls on the go. But it would have been unwieldy to have someone using their regular phone (perhaps even a local call, which are one price fits all/not metered in the U.S.) pay the outrageous fees to contact the owner of the mobile phone. (And *someone* has to pay the costs of that conversation)
Cell phones were then percieved as an additional cost over the baseline of a regular phone call.
It's somewhat of an anachronism now, because cell phone costs are competitive with -- if not cheaper than -- landline phones. However, since the U.S. still has unmetered local calling, it would still cause problems. Say I'm some teenage girl. I could spend 3 hours a night talking to my friends on their cell phones from my local phone. If *I* don't pay to call and *they* don't pay to recieve the system gets out of wack.
We could get rid that local service plan, but it's pretty popular here. Plus, that's why the internet took off so quickly in the U.S. Folks could call to their ISP for no charge. Of course, now, because of that, we're behind in broadband.
nice comeback
It's just U.S. centric and always has been.
Uh, I read The Washington Post and don't have much trouble finding out about it. They've also had a bunch of editorials etc.
The Post also did a nice big fast A1 lead story on its own poll finding that the majority of Americans don't support gay unions.
This despite that the Post as an employer is gay friendly, is in a gay-friendly city and is gay friendly editorial-wise.
Heheh I read your blog for a second too. Calling America's liberal's "socialists" just shows you have no idea what you're talking about. This country, including most "liberals" balk at even the most minor shifts towards "social democratic" type of institutions, which are a far cry from socialism.
Anyway, you outweigh the liklihood and support of the FMA.
Yes, we were idiots. I work for the Post in a limited degree and we now have a sheet of paper on a quite visible bulletin board describing how we were idiots.
The
Now what does MSNBC need with that information, in relation to your experiences with spam? Seems fishy to me...
Well, if they want to do a story on them, they might actually want to be able to CONTACT you. And let's hope that major news organizations require that people who report things to them are actually, REAL PEOPLE. Not just random e-mail addresses signed by Haha G. Ottcha
Because I can't code. I find writing definitions hard and my day job involves sitting at a desk, so I'd probably find digging a well pretty taxing on my muscles.
...I like my job and career, but I work to get money to buy things I want and need. Otherwise I'd just spend it sitting at the beach--at least a good bit more of it. That's why people invented money, because it provides the most efficient way to trade skills.
Should I build my own computer? Perhaps I should create my own chips with open-sourced schematics. (Add sand, aluminum, other hazardous chemicals, microwave on medium for 5 minutes. Viola!)
If my neighbor wants to come over and DIG MY WELL FOR ME ala Linus, than great. If it gives me clean water, we're set. But, I'm looking out my window right now and I don't see any movement.
Yes, they will when they have to. When they start logging on to sites that just arn't there anymore.
;-).
Now, I'm not going to pay for general news today. I can get it at the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, MSNBC, LA Times etc. etc. etc. I'd pay if they all dissapeared, but they won't.
NYTimes is profitable. The Washington Post's website is it's only real national edition and too strategically important. Others are similarly situated almost all are heading towards profitability. The WSJ is pay only and profitable. Salon is... well it just doesn't die
But, you know what, I've put some bucks into political blogs I read to keep them moderately healthy. I'd hate to see them go and -- more importantly -- I'd pay a moderate fee if they went pay-per-view.
The New Republic went mostly pay-per-view a couple months back. It gave me the little push I needed to subscribe to the deadtree version, which gives access to articles online.
And I subscribe to ArsTech's forums, since I habitate there fairly often and I want to help keep that site alive.
Finally, I work at a company that publishes $1,000/year newsletters via the internet. (Granted its PDF, not HTML) It content and people certainly pay, even if it isn't the general public.
Yes, I'm ahead of the curve. I'm obviously willing to pay for pulp-based content as well, which many aren't even willing to do.
For those stuck in 2001, believing you are the only one who "get's it" that the 90s were irrational exuberence and everything dotcom was dumb: Get off your high horse. Everyone knows, even those in business and things are improving. Profits are being squeezed out--even in the crappy economic times.
The internet is just a different way to transmit information. There is nothing inherent about it that means people won't pay for entertainment and valuable information there.
The copyright law needs to revert back to the 14-year limit, with certain circumstances making that time frames SHORTER
Prepare to see all SORTS of artists going even more starving. I'm an aspiring photojournalist. Guess what all the folks who made it tell me. If you're great, it takes 5 years to build an archive of shots that is going to be able to moderately support you and allow you to start paying off your debts. It's copyright that gives a photographer that ability. If 9 years later those images that I took go into the public domain, I will be forever working to maintain a barely-decent level of income.
If *I* make it, I get to control it until my death. Period.
If I take a photograph and post it on my web site for people to see for free, I don't want to see it end up in a commercial tomorrow. Copyright is the only thing protecting me from that.
Life + 90 years is not reasonable, I don't see why my great grandkids should profit from my work, but neither is 14 years.
I'm coming to this "discussion" a bit late so it's not likely I'll be noticed, but the attitude of readers here is truly ignorant.
YES Microsoft owns a share of MSNBC, but that does not mean that it taints ever single article. MSNBC has shown it is more than willing to post articles that are not favorable to the company. And Slate, which this was written on, is a RESPECTED NEWS ZINE. To throw that "value" away by writing a "biased," yet POSITIVE article on google is ludicrious.
To believe that behemoth corporations are hive minds that are solely focused on certain goals throughout their structure is just ignorant.
Trust me, Gates had nothing to do with this article.
Friggin read it.
It's headlined "Digging for Googleholes:
Google may be our new god, but it's not omnipotent."
Did anyone actually bother to interpret that. It says that Google isn't perfect, but it's cleary the BEST. That's what's written between every line. "Google is magnificent, but it could be better". If that's an advertisement for MSN search, then Microsoft's got some more serious problems.