Wrong, unless you're only talking about these yet-to-be-released smart watches. Anyone with a Pebble or Metawatch can knows what they do.
I finally got my pebble about 3 months ago, so let me give you my $0.02 worth.
I don't use my phone a whole lot. It's a personal phone, so I don't use it for work, except when I'm away from the office I will occasionally check and respond to email. I purchased a pebble because I thought it sounded like a cool idea, and I could use a new, decent-looking watch (I already had a couple of standard watches that I'd use when camping, hiking, or doing other things outdoors where the watch may be subject to minor abuse). At the $150 price-point, it was not a big leap, even for someone who isn't using their phone non-stop.
I not only thought the pebble looked good, but I also liked the idea of being able to have any number of customized watch faces and having the ability to create my own (with their SDK).
I liked the idea of keeping my phone on silent, in my pocket, checking texts and incoming phone calls by glancing at my wrist when it vibrates. Being able to receive all notifications you would receive on your cell phone on the watch itself, without having to take my phone out of my pocket (or laptop bag, etc) was enough to sell me on it.
And I think it's enough for there to be a market for these smart/dumb watches. This isn't even to mention the many "apps" out there being created for the pebble. One that I've actually used is the FreeCaddie app that uses your phone's GPS to send yardage information to your watch while playing golf. It may seem impractical in that most golfers I know don't want to keep their phone in their pocket, or a watch on their wrist, while playing, but strapping my watch to the golf cart and keeping the phone in my bag is a really convenient way to get GPS on the course, without spending $300 on another device.
I think the fact that I'm not a hardcore hardware geek, only having used my pebble fairly lightly, and I still find it worth the money and useful is (albeit anecdotal) evidence that smart watches do have a market and I believe it's here to stay. The key will be getting the buyers to take that initial leap since, on the surface, they seem superfluous when you're already carrying around a smart phone.
If and when an Apple device hits is when we'll see motion in the market, whether that device is good or bad.
You may be right in that it could take a big player like Apple, or Samsung, to enter the market before we know if the general public will bite. However, since Pebble has hit Best Buy, we just might know before Apple does anything.
Living in Kentucky all my life (now in Louisville) and traveling to rural areas quite often for camping, hiking, and the like, I've been able to see some pretty clear skies and some impressive displays of galactic splendor.
But nothing has compared to what I saw when camping in the Canyonlands of Utah in March. It was a nice clear and crisp night and the amount of light from the stars was almost overwhelming. I doubt I'll ever see anything as impressive again as it relates to the night sky. I only wish I had more than my mediocre digital camera with me.
...it's still conjecture. But to be fair, so was my statement. Without any good stats on who can afford the car they're driving, we're all speculating based on our own experience and point of view. I almost regret posting now, thanks!;-P
You can. That it will take the better part of a week to get from one end of the country to the other (and that again back) is a show stopper.
Yeah, but if you're that opposed to how the TSA operates, there'll be sacrifices in applying your principles. Either shorter vacationing time (between travel to and from) or fewer vacations (since they would take longer).
Does your employer reimburse you for the trip, both for gas and mileage?
Yes. Usually I'll use a rental car and we pass that cost and the cost of gas onto our customers (we're a small software shop, and when we travel it's at the request of our customers) as long as we keep it within "reasonable" travel expenses. The cost of a rental + gas is almost always way cheaper than flying.
On a recent trip to Texas, from Kentucky, we had a cancellation and a couple of delays along the way. It ended up that we could have driven there and either arrived at the same time, or a little earlier. I was wishing we had driven by the end of the day, too.
You have a point about flying abroad, to see family or for important (like religious, not sporting) events.
But the GP does have a point... there is a LOT of flying being done by a big portion of those who are up in arms over how the TSA is treating people. A lot of flying that doesn't have to happen. You're right that in a "free" country, we should be able to fly for our vacations, but if principles important to you contradict that, then don't fly. You can drive anywhere in the continental US for a vacation. Some may say it even enhances the experience, being able to see more. You can drive to work if you work in a different city. Just leave earlier.
The point being that if those who are so vehemently opposed to how the TSA operates would act upon those principles, then the airlines would begin to feel it. And we all know that the government wouldn't allow the airlines to start collapsing.
Even eliminating flying for vacation and unnecessary business travel (I regularly drive for work when it's only 4-6 hours, when I know others would fly for that kind of business trip) would make a huge impact.
That's the exact opposite of what I've seen. When I'm travelling to St Louis, the ones doing 80 or 90 are all in BMWs or Escalades or some other expensive car. I've noticed that the bigger and more expensive it is, the more likely they don't give a flying fuck...
Just because they're driving a BMW or Escalde does not always mean they have the "ability to afford to repair or replace the car". I would hazard to guess that a lot of them can't afford the car (evidenced by borrowing money to "buy" it, or by leasing it).
Your rule of thumb is illogical.
Well, your argument to the contrary is based on an invalid assumption.
Thanks for confirming what I've long thought. Watching LIVE sports (collegiate and professional) is the only thing that keeps me from dumping DirecTV.
This simply means that ESPN is just making too much money with their current arrangements to ever want to really pursue a subscription-based model for LIVE broadcasts. Yes, I know about the Watch ESPN app/ESPN3/ESPN360. Those are lame attempts at streaming live sports and doesn't include much content at all. The same goes for the NFL Network (which offered live radio streams, but not video, last year).
I guess we, as customers, need to force the hands of the traditional content providers (cable/satellite TV) by jumping ship. Until they start losing enough money, they aren't going to rock the boat.
To that end, I guess I'll just have to live with watching OTA whatever the major networks carry, as far as live sports goes.
I also wanted to comment on the suggestion that someone would want to substitute family members into Shakespearean plays. I don't think that whoever wrote that part of the patent text has read any Shakespeare.
Haha, well, without any mention of the traps commercially available, and with your description being very close, I'd still say it was a reasonable conclusion;-)
Haha, yeah, no doubt. I was wearing mainly Columbia clothing, very thin, moisture-wicking type stuff (both the long-sleeve shirt and pants) with ventilation. It was still hot, but fortunately it didn't go over the mid 80's while I was there and clouds provided some respite from the sun. Though, if you're tortured by them like I usually am, hot + mosquitoes is worse than mildly hotter - moquitoes, especially when carrying a canoe on your shoulders and they're swarming around your head, inside the canoe.
I'd doubt anyone who's commenting on this article hasn't heard of them, but the Parent does sound like they may be living under a rock.
I'd be interested in a do-it-yourself version, as those that exist for purchase are outrageously expensive IMO.
I've also always been a mosquito magnet. I just came back from a trip to the Boundary Waters up in Minneosta and let me tell you, if you are one of the unfortunate 20%, be prepared with 40% DEET spray, a head net, and long-sleeve shirts and pants. Otherwise you're miserable up there.
I'm not familiar enough with the kinds of abuse, as its being called, that Linus is doling out on the mailing list(s) to comment, but your simple statement is all I feel needs to be said on the matter. If he's abusing people that take such things personally, feel publicly humiliated, or are embarrassed by such harassment, then he'll be creating enemies. Whether that's significant in any way, who knows, I guess it depends on the enemy. Speaking of which, based on the anecdotal evidence among the comments, Linus must have quite a few enemies.
I agree that none of it is necessary to be successful in the sciences, or more specifically engineering. It also doesn't necessarily guarantee a more well-rounded, thoughtful person, either. That entirely depends upon the person, their motivations for taking the class ("damn, gotta take this stupid thing" vs. "i have to take it, so i might as well see if i can learn something"), and of course the person teaching the class. However, if you end up with one of those professors that cater to the psuedo-intellectuals the humanities seem to be fairly rampant with (the facebook-posting ne'er-do-nothings you refer to), then it's your responsibility to get the most out of the subject matter. Who hasn't taken a class, or even been in a single lecture, where the professor was worthless as far as any real "teaching" is concerned? In those cases, you must take it upon yourself to do the teaching and the learning. It's not the subject matter that's failing you, it's the professor (or more generally, the educational institution itself).
And forming logical arguments doesn't always win a debate, I hope you're aware of that.
Well aware. Thanks to having an above average professor (according to other accounts here and elsewhere), that was Philosophy 101.
And actually, this rivalry got started for different reasons. Humanities students always complain about exams being hard, how their statistics professors are unfair, how they have to spend so much time studying. Yet our work load is significantly higher, difference being that we don't have the time to whine about it.
That's a gross generalization of students in the humanities, though I won't deny there's some truth to it. It's all about perspective and what you've been exposed to. If all you know are your humanities classes, then sure, their (humanities) statistics class might be their toughest. For those who went to an engineering school, then it seems petty to whine about that kind of class, when our easiest class very well may be Probs & Stats (it was for me). It's all relative. But you can't deny the fact that there are plenty of engineering students who whine about their course load or difficulty. I've known a lot who brag about it. What's the point of that?
And not having solved an integral since college, well that might be in some disciplines.
Very true. That comment was really meant more for the other software engineers.
Oh and before you ask, electronic engineer here
Ah, it's all becoming clear now!:-P (I have a lot of close friends who are EEs)
Just because your academic experience was light on humanities does not mean that they are not "subversive". That's rather the point of TFA - that academia, particularly science and engineering tracks, needs more of that.
Thank you for saying that. I think a lot of people commenting here kind of lost sight of the point of TFA. Which, from what I read, was that we all need to be exposed to more subject matter than just one, it benefits us all.
I agree with some of what you say, but after reading a bunch of posts where people are trying to use anecdotal evidence as proof that something is as such everywhere, I had to comment at some point.
I agree engineering students should get some basic classes on economy and maybe one on communication so they stop making awful presentations.
Agree.
But psychology, sociology, etc., hell no!
Disagree. There's no harm in this, and in my experience (like what everyone else's comment is based on, but no one is disclaiming) you can only benefit. Yes I slept through most of my Psychology lectures and still got an A, but there were interesting bits that made me think from time to time. There were humanities classes that made me read books that I would have never picked up, and I'm grateful for it. I still refer back to things I learned in Music History from time to time.
It is my belief that engineering students should take a healthy dose of humanities classes, not as many as possible as the article implies and not none at all as most comments here scream outright. The more well-rounded we ALL are, engineers and humanitarians (if that's the right word here) alike, the better off we all are.
I have yet to meet a research psychologist that actually uses statistics correctly.
Never mind the anecdotal evidence, but it's not proof of anything, especially when I would lay a healthy bet on saying most "engineers" (or those purporting to be an engineer) haven't done an integral since school, and a lot probably don't recall for what they are even used.
And political science and philosophy majors tend to lose flat-out in debates against engineering students, simply because the latter knows how to analyse the situation correctly.
Disagree. But then again, your evidence is as anecdotal as mine. I agree that engineering students typically know how to analyze a problem or situation better, but the Philosophy courses that I took taught me a lot about how you should form logical arguments, critical in these debates about which you speak. On the other hand, the Logic classes at the engineering school taught me the subject from a different perspective, where I learned more about how to combine logical statements to get the desired outcome. Both related, and neither more significant than the other in my eyes.
Engineering is more about analysing problems, seeing the possible solutions for said problems and then implementing them.
Agree.
Arguing and being sceptic is based on the same premises.
Somewhat agree, but a subject such as philosophy is heavily based on forming arguments and being skeptical.
So in fact it should be the other way around.
Agree, in a way. It should go both ways.
TL;DR;
This war on humanities is mostly derived from a preconceived notion that "they're stupid and we're smart" that a lot of students in the sciences have towards those in the humanities. If a lot of us would get off our pedestal for a second, and open our minds to more than what's outside the realm of science, we may just learn something. It doesn't mean we have to denounce what we've learned in our science and engineering courses.
I was a Computer Engineering and Computer Science major and got a M.Eng.
I had surgery to reconstruct the ACL in my left leg about a year and a half ago. I had heard horror stories (anecdotes?) about somewhere someone getting the wrong leg cut open. So, I did what my sister had done 18 years prior for the same type of surgery: take a sharpie and write "wrong leg:-)" on the right leg.
I was lucky to get a competent, personable surgeon who, immediately upon entering the prep room before surgery, picked up a sharpie and put a check mark on the correct leg, without noticing what I had done.
I'd like to think this is a sign of improvements in such scenarios.
Slashdot Mirror
can knows what they do
I cringe at my own faux pas.
Nobody knows what they do yet.
Wrong, unless you're only talking about these yet-to-be-released smart watches. Anyone with a Pebble or Metawatch can knows what they do.
I finally got my pebble about 3 months ago, so let me give you my $0.02 worth.
I don't use my phone a whole lot. It's a personal phone, so I don't use it for work, except when I'm away from the office I will occasionally check and respond to email. I purchased a pebble because I thought it sounded like a cool idea, and I could use a new, decent-looking watch (I already had a couple of standard watches that I'd use when camping, hiking, or doing other things outdoors where the watch may be subject to minor abuse). At the $150 price-point, it was not a big leap, even for someone who isn't using their phone non-stop.
I not only thought the pebble looked good, but I also liked the idea of being able to have any number of customized watch faces and having the ability to create my own (with their SDK).
I liked the idea of keeping my phone on silent, in my pocket, checking texts and incoming phone calls by glancing at my wrist when it vibrates. Being able to receive all notifications you would receive on your cell phone on the watch itself, without having to take my phone out of my pocket (or laptop bag, etc) was enough to sell me on it.
And I think it's enough for there to be a market for these smart/dumb watches. This isn't even to mention the many "apps" out there being created for the pebble. One that I've actually used is the FreeCaddie app that uses your phone's GPS to send yardage information to your watch while playing golf. It may seem impractical in that most golfers I know don't want to keep their phone in their pocket, or a watch on their wrist, while playing, but strapping my watch to the golf cart and keeping the phone in my bag is a really convenient way to get GPS on the course, without spending $300 on another device.
I think the fact that I'm not a hardcore hardware geek, only having used my pebble fairly lightly, and I still find it worth the money and useful is (albeit anecdotal) evidence that smart watches do have a market and I believe it's here to stay. The key will be getting the buyers to take that initial leap since, on the surface, they seem superfluous when you're already carrying around a smart phone.
If and when an Apple device hits is when we'll see motion in the market, whether that device is good or bad.
You may be right in that it could take a big player like Apple, or Samsung, to enter the market before we know if the general public will bite. However, since Pebble has hit Best Buy, we just might know before Apple does anything.
Living in Kentucky all my life (now in Louisville) and traveling to rural areas quite often for camping, hiking, and the like, I've been able to see some pretty clear skies and some impressive displays of galactic splendor.
But nothing has compared to what I saw when camping in the Canyonlands of Utah in March. It was a nice clear and crisp night and the amount of light from the stars was almost overwhelming. I doubt I'll ever see anything as impressive again as it relates to the night sky. I only wish I had more than my mediocre digital camera with me.
And if it continues as such, it will most certainly become a finite loop.
Most "rich" people
...it's still conjecture. But to be fair, so was my statement. Without any good stats on who can afford the car they're driving, we're all speculating based on our own experience and point of view. I almost regret posting now, thanks! ;-P
You can. That it will take the better part of a week to get from one end of the country to the other (and that again back) is a show stopper.
Yeah, but if you're that opposed to how the TSA operates, there'll be sacrifices in applying your principles. Either shorter vacationing time (between travel to and from) or fewer vacations (since they would take longer).
Does your employer reimburse you for the trip, both for gas and mileage?
Yes. Usually I'll use a rental car and we pass that cost and the cost of gas onto our customers (we're a small software shop, and when we travel it's at the request of our customers) as long as we keep it within "reasonable" travel expenses. The cost of a rental + gas is almost always way cheaper than flying.
On a recent trip to Texas, from Kentucky, we had a cancellation and a couple of delays along the way. It ended up that we could have driven there and either arrived at the same time, or a little earlier. I was wishing we had driven by the end of the day, too.
You have a point about flying abroad, to see family or for important (like religious, not sporting) events.
But the GP does have a point... there is a LOT of flying being done by a big portion of those who are up in arms over how the TSA is treating people. A lot of flying that doesn't have to happen. You're right that in a "free" country, we should be able to fly for our vacations, but if principles important to you contradict that, then don't fly. You can drive anywhere in the continental US for a vacation. Some may say it even enhances the experience, being able to see more. You can drive to work if you work in a different city. Just leave earlier.
The point being that if those who are so vehemently opposed to how the TSA operates would act upon those principles, then the airlines would begin to feel it. And we all know that the government wouldn't allow the airlines to start collapsing.
Even eliminating flying for vacation and unnecessary business travel (I regularly drive for work when it's only 4-6 hours, when I know others would fly for that kind of business trip) would make a huge impact.
Just because they're driving a BMW or Escalde does not always mean they have the "ability to afford to repair or replace the car". I would hazard to guess that a lot of them can't afford the car (evidenced by borrowing money to "buy" it, or by leasing it).
Well, your argument to the contrary is based on an invalid assumption.
Wish I had mod points. I'll comment instead...
Most everyone here is forgetting that we know what the NSA is doing. And that's a big point to miss.
The key, that I think Thanshin is eluding to, is what do we do about it?
Thanks for confirming what I've long thought. Watching LIVE sports (collegiate and professional) is the only thing that keeps me from dumping DirecTV.
This simply means that ESPN is just making too much money with their current arrangements to ever want to really pursue a subscription-based model for LIVE broadcasts. Yes, I know about the Watch ESPN app/ESPN3/ESPN360. Those are lame attempts at streaming live sports and doesn't include much content at all. The same goes for the NFL Network (which offered live radio streams, but not video, last year).
I guess we, as customers, need to force the hands of the traditional content providers (cable/satellite TV) by jumping ship. Until they start losing enough money, they aren't going to rock the boat.
To that end, I guess I'll just have to live with watching OTA whatever the major networks carry, as far as live sports goes.
I wanted to say that I agree 100%.
I also wanted to comment on the suggestion that someone would want to substitute family members into Shakespearean plays. I don't think that whoever wrote that part of the patent text has read any Shakespeare.
The velocity is accelerating!
Haha, well, without any mention of the traps commercially available, and with your description being very close, I'd still say it was a reasonable conclusion ;-)
Haha, yeah, no doubt. I was wearing mainly Columbia clothing, very thin, moisture-wicking type stuff (both the long-sleeve shirt and pants) with ventilation. It was still hot, but fortunately it didn't go over the mid 80's while I was there and clouds provided some respite from the sun. Though, if you're tortured by them like I usually am, hot + mosquitoes is worse than mildly hotter - moquitoes, especially when carrying a canoe on your shoulders and they're swarming around your head, inside the canoe.
I'd doubt anyone who's commenting on this article hasn't heard of them, but the Parent does sound like they may be living under a rock.
I'd be interested in a do-it-yourself version, as those that exist for purchase are outrageously expensive IMO.
I've also always been a mosquito magnet. I just came back from a trip to the Boundary Waters up in Minneosta and let me tell you, if you are one of the unfortunate 20%, be prepared with 40% DEET spray, a head net, and long-sleeve shirts and pants. Otherwise you're miserable up there.
Here here (or "THIS." as the kids are saying).
I'm not familiar enough with the kinds of abuse, as its being called, that Linus is doling out on the mailing list(s) to comment, but your simple statement is all I feel needs to be said on the matter. If he's abusing people that take such things personally, feel publicly humiliated, or are embarrassed by such harassment, then he'll be creating enemies. Whether that's significant in any way, who knows, I guess it depends on the enemy. Speaking of which, based on the anecdotal evidence among the comments, Linus must have quite a few enemies.
Haha, you have a point. I guess my mistake was assuming that someone commenting on the subject matter has some experience related to it. My bad!
And forming logical arguments doesn't always win a debate, I hope you're aware of that.
Well aware. Thanks to having an above average professor (according to other accounts here and elsewhere), that was Philosophy 101.
And actually, this rivalry got started for different reasons. Humanities students always complain about exams being hard, how their statistics professors are unfair, how they have to spend so much time studying. Yet our work load is significantly higher, difference being that we don't have the time to whine about it.
That's a gross generalization of students in the humanities, though I won't deny there's some truth to it. It's all about perspective and what you've been exposed to. If all you know are your humanities classes, then sure, their (humanities) statistics class might be their toughest. For those who went to an engineering school, then it seems petty to whine about that kind of class, when our easiest class very well may be Probs & Stats (it was for me). It's all relative.
But you can't deny the fact that there are plenty of engineering students who whine about their course load or difficulty. I've known a lot who brag about it. What's the point of that?
And not having solved an integral since college, well that might be in some disciplines.
Very true. That comment was really meant more for the other software engineers.
Oh and before you ask, electronic engineer here
Ah, it's all becoming clear now! :-P (I have a lot of close friends who are EEs)
There's a lot of truth to that... and it's where the squeaky wheel wins.
Just because your academic experience was light on humanities does not mean that they are not "subversive". That's rather the point of TFA - that academia, particularly science and engineering tracks, needs more of that.
Thank you for saying that. I think a lot of people commenting here kind of lost sight of the point of TFA. Which, from what I read, was that we all need to be exposed to more subject matter than just one, it benefits us all.
I agree engineering students should get some basic classes on economy and maybe one on communication so they stop making awful presentations.
Agree.
But psychology, sociology, etc., hell no!
Disagree. There's no harm in this, and in my experience (like what everyone else's comment is based on, but no one is disclaiming) you can only benefit. Yes I slept through most of my Psychology lectures and still got an A, but there were interesting bits that made me think from time to time. There were humanities classes that made me read books that I would have never picked up, and I'm grateful for it. I still refer back to things I learned in Music History from time to time.
It is my belief that engineering students should take a healthy dose of humanities classes, not as many as possible as the article implies and not none at all as most comments here scream outright. The more well-rounded we ALL are, engineers and humanitarians (if that's the right word here) alike, the better off we all are.
I have yet to meet a research psychologist that actually uses statistics correctly.
Never mind the anecdotal evidence, but it's not proof of anything, especially when I would lay a healthy bet on saying most "engineers" (or those purporting to be an engineer) haven't done an integral since school, and a lot probably don't recall for what they are even used.
And political science and philosophy majors tend to lose flat-out in debates against engineering students, simply because the latter knows how to analyse the situation correctly.
Disagree. But then again, your evidence is as anecdotal as mine. I agree that engineering students typically know how to analyze a problem or situation better, but the Philosophy courses that I took taught me a lot about how you should form logical arguments, critical in these debates about which you speak. On the other hand, the Logic classes at the engineering school taught me the subject from a different perspective, where I learned more about how to combine logical statements to get the desired outcome. Both related, and neither more significant than the other in my eyes.
Engineering is more about analysing problems, seeing the possible solutions for said problems and then implementing them.
Agree.
Arguing and being sceptic is based on the same premises.
Somewhat agree, but a subject such as philosophy is heavily based on forming arguments and being skeptical.
So in fact it should be the other way around.
Agree, in a way. It should go both ways.
TL;DR;
This war on humanities is mostly derived from a preconceived notion that "they're stupid and we're smart" that a lot of students in the sciences have towards those in the humanities. If a lot of us would get off our pedestal for a second, and open our minds to more than what's outside the realm of science, we may just learn something.
It doesn't mean we have to denounce what we've learned in our science and engineering courses.
I was a Computer Engineering and Computer Science major and got a M.Eng.
...NSA watch lists are a superset of "list of all humans currently alive"...
I sure hope I'm on there.
Ha! "right" as in opposite of "left", not "correct".
I had surgery to reconstruct the ACL in my left leg about a year and a half ago. I had heard horror stories (anecdotes?) about somewhere someone getting the wrong leg cut open. So, I did what my sister had done 18 years prior for the same type of surgery: take a sharpie and write "wrong leg :-)" on the right leg.
I was lucky to get a competent, personable surgeon who, immediately upon entering the prep room before surgery, picked up a sharpie and put a check mark on the correct leg, without noticing what I had done.
I'd like to think this is a sign of improvements in such scenarios.