Objectively, yes, it has one feature which makes it superior to most other images. It is "the standard". That is, the same work has been done with the image a zillion times, and much of that work can be referenced for comparison.
It has already been mentioned that Windows is the "standard", and that the standard is not always the "best" tool for the job. I can agree with that. But, show me the Linux administrator who can't use Windows, and I'll show you an incompetent Linux administrator.
Same here. The COURSE wasn't built around this image, was it? TFA implies that this image was used for one assignment in the course.
If, in all other respects, the image were exactly the same, but the subject in the image was selling makeup, would people still be offended by it? If not, why not?
I looked at the original full image. In that image, there is no part of Lena's body that is not on public display on beaches around the world.
And - even if there were - what of it? Do the people who are offended by the image not possess the same body parts? I mean, WTF? Don't they see all of that and more, every time they bathe?
Oh, I think I get it. They don't like their own bodies, how can we expect them to like images of bodies that are in any way similar to their own?
Not sure how serious you are. My rights end where your RIGHTS begin. You don't have a right to feel good. You don't have a right to "not be offended". I hope you're being sarcastic. The sarcasm font on my computer doesn't work well, so I can't tell.
I trust the judgement of peers before I trust the judgement of a shrink. I've heard to many things from and about shrinks to believe that they know shit from shinola.
Color vision at four years old. I couldn't tell the green from the brown Crayola. And, the purple or violet crayola looked blue to me.
Red flowers in a field of green are pretty much invisible, as you state. Many times as a youth, my mother would exclaim over some pretty red flowers as we drove by. I would look, see nothing, and just look at her.
I should have realized that I was color blind around age twelve. Got interested in electronics, found some schematics, and tore into old electrical gadgets that didn't work. I did alright with solid color wires, but wires that were striped or dotted with alternating colors were just beyond me. I remember a red wire with some kind of stripes on it, particularly. Initially, I identified that wire, and started tracing it. Soon - it just bled into some wildly ugly mess, and I wasn't even sure that it was a red wire any longer.
There are two distinct kinds of poor color vision - one involves red, the other involves green. Many men have problems with one or the other. Those of us who have BOTH kinds are somewhat rare. Not especially rare, but somewhat.
And, color deficiency isn't "equal" among us, either. I've read many times that one in four men is at least a little bit color blind, while only one in a thousand women is even slightly color blind. Your son may have less deficiency than me, or he may have more.
Personally, all of the purple, violet, lilac, rose, pink, lavender family blends together. And, maroon. I bought a car in the seventies. It was a beautifully done, well polished black Chevy Impala. Almost a jet black, it was very dark. Drove it home, and my mama admired it, saying what a lovely color it was - but she didn't think that I liked maroon. Looked at her like she was nuts - told her it was a black car. Ooooooooops. I took another look at the title in my hand, and it also said the car was maroon. Oh well - I drove it just like it was black!
Greens are a little harder to explain. I see shades of green, but I guess I don't see exactly what everyone else sees. Mostly, when I look out across my field, or into the trees, I see varying shades of darkness - greens running into browns. There have been times that I've had hints of what I may be missing. A bright sunlit morning on the Pennsylvania turnpike, right after a rain, with the sun behind me, highlighting bright yellow-greens, picking out darker greens, all quite distinctive from the brown trunks, and suddenly glinting off of the Pa. state patrol car on the side of the road. (the rest of THAT story is even further off topic - I'll summarize with "cop cars can't catch motorcycles in traffic all the time")
When I joined the Navy, I was contracted in as an Aviation Ordinance man. Got to boot camp, took their vision tests, and was informed that the Navy had zero use for me around aircraft, or around ordinance, or around electronics. Color blind sailors are restricted to paperwork, supply work, chipping paint, and other unexciting work. I didn't want to go home, so I took a job in supply.
Has bad color vision hurt me? I don't guess so. I've had a happy, adventurous life. Some doors were closed to me, but I'm so damned good that I just opened up other doors, and found good times there instead. So, I didn't get to hang bombs and missiles on aircraft - instead, I counted beans, bolts, and bullets on a destroyer. I had a great time sight seeing around the world all the same. And, I paid my dues along the way.
Color vision probably won't be a big deal for your son, either. He won't be a world renowned electronics engineer, most likely. But, there is a whole world of other things that he can excel at. Maybe he'll be like me, and race motorcycles against the cops. Oh - you probably didn't want to hear that. Don't worry - not all color blind people are as depraved as I am - he'll probably do well. Normally, it's just not a big deal.
(now you are probably asking yourself just exactly how serious I am, LMAO)
Well - I think that I made it fairly clear that I had seen robots doing roughly the same job that these robots are designed to do. I think that my post was less binary than you imply. There are groups doing pretty amazing things with robots today. When they untethered that dog/wolf robot, that was actually newsworthy. When it first learned to walk over rubble, that was then newsworthy. Prior to that, when it first learned to walk, that was then newsworthy.
The reason that I didn't consider this story to be especially newsworthy is, the tasks that these particular robots are performing were already being done by robots a lifetime ago. (My sons are all in their twenties, so twenty years is a "lifetime".)
Among other newsworthy robot stories being published today, are the automated facial recognition stories. And, another story about identifying High Occupancy Vehicle scofflaws. Bomb disposal and ordinance will stay interesting for a long time to come, even if the robots don't get a whole lot better at the job.
Picking stuff off a shelf, while navigating a nice clean, smooth even concrete floor? I'm sorry, my friend, but I can't see the newsworthiness here.
I would have found this story more interesting if some young parent were gushing over their toddler's newly learned ability to pick stuff off of shelves, and carry it across the room, and place it on a table. "Junior just LOVES to help Mother set the table for dinner!"
Robots are coming of age now. How much interest would be generated, if someone published a story about his/her fifteen year old daughter learning to move cutlery from a drawer, onto the dining room table? Not so much, huh?
Maybe you can answer your own question, if you'll answer a couple other questions first.
Who, exactly, would decide to dispatch 10,000 robots to Nepal? Who, exactly, has the resources to actually send them? Who, exactly, has the AUTHORITY to make that decision, and to appropriate resources to that mission?
And, finally, how, exactly, would that mission benefit those people who own that authority and those resources?
There are a number of conspiracy theories floating around, regarding the depopulation of the earth. Taken all together, the general idea is, once the wealthy and ruling classes no longer have any use for the masses, they are just going to get rid of the masses. I don't buy into any of those theories - but a thinking person should do a little thinking before he dismisses them out of hand.
I'll grant that having those robots available would be beneficial to the masses, but no real benefit would accrue to the ruling classes.
I'm color blind, or color impaired. Quite naturally, I don't really see pink most of the time. Hot pink, in bright sunlight, yeah, but there are shades that I just don't see. I'm not sure if the robots were pink or not - they were a light color, could have been beige, white, or some light shade of pink.
Mary Kay does run pink Freightliners and trailers up and down the road though. Some of them are dark enough that I can actually see the pink, others are lighter, and they just look white to me. Most of the trailers look white to me, with a pink stripe down the side.
This is what Google offered when I did an image search.
At LEAST fifteen years ago, more like twenty years ago, I delivered freight to a Mary Kay plant that had this. Perhaps those robots were less advanced than Amazon's robots - but then, Mary Kay has had plenty of time to improve on their robots.
I'll be honest - I didn't have any opportunity to just stand around and watch those robots, or time to interrogate the people working at the plant. And, no way in hell would anyone let me play with those robots. All that I can tell you for sure, is that robots were wandering the plant floor, carrying articles from hither to thither. Some would disappear in between the aisles of warehouse shelves, carrying a box of something, and reappear empty. Others would go between the shelves empty, and come back with something. Most would then aim themselves through the doors, into the plant proper, presumably to deliver those items to a work station, or to get items from a work station.
Oh - yeah - it's wonderful. We're moving closer to that imagined post-prosperity world, huh? I'm not believing that the ruling class is going to share any of that prosperity with the masses, but, yeah, we're moving closer to it.
Reporting on the trial - testimony establishes pretty clearly that NoW did indeed hack into the telephone.
So - the phone automagically deletes messages that have been listened to, after 72 hours. NoW hacker listens to messages - 72 hours later, they are erased. Yeah - that would definitely screw up the police investigation, now wouldn't it? Intentionally or not, NoW was helping the deletion schedule to move along, and delete mails, giving every appearance that Milly might be alive.
The wikipedia entry seems to confirm what you say - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... specifically, "Dowler's phone automatically deleted messages 72 hours after being listened to.[47]" HOWEVER, "in September 2011 it was reported that the Dowler family had been offered £2m in personal damages.[49]"
Now, is it true, or is it not true, that Murdoch ALSO paid off celebrities, in the same manner, after having "hacked" into their phone/email/other accounts? It sure looks like the Guardian called it correctly - to me, anyway.
Brief statement that falls in line with my point of view - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b5d... "Until now the paper’s illegal actions, while costly and damaging to its reputation, were largely seen as being targeted at celebrities and politicians. The News of the World has been battling to draw a line under a scandal that has already seen two people sent to prison."
I'll admit that it's possible that my take on the story is not entirely accurate. But - unless you come up with something convincing, I'll continue to hold that view. Murdoch's minions were making a lot of money by "hacking" into celebritie's accounts, with his tacit approval, if not his clearly stated approval. He was making more money off those tabloid articles than he was spending on settlements. IMHO - Murdoch's boys and girls did exactly the same thing with Milly Dowler's phone, that they had already done with other phones.
But, right or wrong, Murdoch is still a freaking scumbag. So are all of his people associated with the case.
The post office photographs and tracks every piece of mail. The other part of that equation hasn't been publicized yet - they have cameras with facial recognition software focused on all their mailboxes.
No, snailmail is not anonymous. It probably was anonymous around 2000. Almost definitely anonymous in 1990. Not any more!
I like it when someone is able to cut to the chase so quickly. Murdoch publications keeps no secrets, unless it serves their purposes. Even then - they fail. I mean, they hacked a dead girl's telephone, but couldn't keep THAT secret, could they? How in hell they gonna keep MY hacking secret?
Best thing is, don't share your secrets with Murdoch.
I'm sitting here, trying to think of one single liberal politico who was competent at anything. All that comes to mind, is Chapaquidik Ted's rum-running dad. Was the old man a liberal?
Excellent post. Excellent. Unfortunately, someone has rewritten history since we have been in school, and these kids are learning something else entirely.
Neo-nazi. Why don't you listen to the words of mid-eastern Muslim leaders who still deny the holocaust, while at the same time praising Hitler. Pull your head out of your arse. Islam is a threat to life around the world. It is at least a great a threat as Nazism was, or the Soviet.
The answer to your question is rather simple. Those "SJW's" embrace anything and everything that tends to weaken America. They hate Christians so much, that they will sacrifice anything, anyone to get at them. They hate the nuclear family just as much. If you appear to be somewhat "average" in any way, they regard you as part of the problem, and they'll sacrifice your ass along with all the rest. They HATE AMERICA!
Islam hates America, so the so-called SJW's find common cause with Islam.
You, AC, get an "attaboy" for at least attempting to understand the situation. You didn't write enough to convince me that you REALLY understand, but you've made a good start.
You're a complete idiot. Christians ran the colonies, and then this country for about 300 years. We didn't have any inquisitions. We had one witch trial that I'm aware of, and the CHURCH ITSELF moved to ensure that it wouldn't happen again. Complete fucking idiot.
Holy fuck - who'da thunk of all that shit? Now I'm wondering how in the hell any of us over age 50 managed to grow up at all!
Stupid motherfucker, huh? Think about it. I can accomplish anything that you can, without the telephone. Now who's stupid?
You're at the mall, and want to look up specs? Big fucking deal - you're a spur of the moment shopper. You see some shiny gadget, you feel like you must have one. DUHHHH!! Already you're an idiot. BUT - let's just suppose that the shiny thing really is somehow unique or something. What I do is, I go home and research the damned thing on my DESKTOP WORKSTATION. See? I have the same functionality that you do, it's just sitting on my desktop. I don't need the instant gratification of looking it all up in the store.
Oh - once I''m sitting at home, that "impulse buying" thing is long behind me. I can also shop for similar devices online, locate the best specs, the best price, and order it for delivery right to my door.
You know, AC, I might have had a tiny bit of respect for your post, had you shown any respect at all. But, I'm a stupid motherfucker. Yeah, uh-huh. Here's a Kleenex - wipe some of that drool off your face, alright? Then, you can go sit in front of the window, and watch the dust motes floating in the sunbeam.
Slashdot Mirror
Objectively, yes, it has one feature which makes it superior to most other images. It is "the standard". That is, the same work has been done with the image a zillion times, and much of that work can be referenced for comparison.
It has already been mentioned that Windows is the "standard", and that the standard is not always the "best" tool for the job. I can agree with that. But, show me the Linux administrator who can't use Windows, and I'll show you an incompetent Linux administrator.
Same here. The COURSE wasn't built around this image, was it? TFA implies that this image was used for one assignment in the course.
If, in all other respects, the image were exactly the same, but the subject in the image was selling makeup, would people still be offended by it? If not, why not?
I looked at the original full image. In that image, there is no part of Lena's body that is not on public display on beaches around the world.
And - even if there were - what of it? Do the people who are offended by the image not possess the same body parts? I mean, WTF? Don't they see all of that and more, every time they bathe?
Oh, I think I get it. They don't like their own bodies, how can we expect them to like images of bodies that are in any way similar to their own?
Not sure how serious you are. My rights end where your RIGHTS begin. You don't have a right to feel good. You don't have a right to "not be offended". I hope you're being sarcastic. The sarcasm font on my computer doesn't work well, so I can't tell.
Sounds about right.
I trust the judgement of peers before I trust the judgement of a shrink. I've heard to many things from and about shrinks to believe that they know shit from shinola.
Ahhhh - that MIGHT explain some of my confusion. I had just ASSumed that any problems associated with colors were my own problems.
Color vision at four years old. I couldn't tell the green from the brown Crayola. And, the purple or violet crayola looked blue to me.
Red flowers in a field of green are pretty much invisible, as you state. Many times as a youth, my mother would exclaim over some pretty red flowers as we drove by. I would look, see nothing, and just look at her.
I should have realized that I was color blind around age twelve. Got interested in electronics, found some schematics, and tore into old electrical gadgets that didn't work. I did alright with solid color wires, but wires that were striped or dotted with alternating colors were just beyond me. I remember a red wire with some kind of stripes on it, particularly. Initially, I identified that wire, and started tracing it. Soon - it just bled into some wildly ugly mess, and I wasn't even sure that it was a red wire any longer.
There are two distinct kinds of poor color vision - one involves red, the other involves green. Many men have problems with one or the other. Those of us who have BOTH kinds are somewhat rare. Not especially rare, but somewhat.
And, color deficiency isn't "equal" among us, either. I've read many times that one in four men is at least a little bit color blind, while only one in a thousand women is even slightly color blind. Your son may have less deficiency than me, or he may have more.
Personally, all of the purple, violet, lilac, rose, pink, lavender family blends together. And, maroon. I bought a car in the seventies. It was a beautifully done, well polished black Chevy Impala. Almost a jet black, it was very dark. Drove it home, and my mama admired it, saying what a lovely color it was - but she didn't think that I liked maroon. Looked at her like she was nuts - told her it was a black car. Ooooooooops. I took another look at the title in my hand, and it also said the car was maroon. Oh well - I drove it just like it was black!
Greens are a little harder to explain. I see shades of green, but I guess I don't see exactly what everyone else sees. Mostly, when I look out across my field, or into the trees, I see varying shades of darkness - greens running into browns. There have been times that I've had hints of what I may be missing. A bright sunlit morning on the Pennsylvania turnpike, right after a rain, with the sun behind me, highlighting bright yellow-greens, picking out darker greens, all quite distinctive from the brown trunks, and suddenly glinting off of the Pa. state patrol car on the side of the road. (the rest of THAT story is even further off topic - I'll summarize with "cop cars can't catch motorcycles in traffic all the time")
When I joined the Navy, I was contracted in as an Aviation Ordinance man. Got to boot camp, took their vision tests, and was informed that the Navy had zero use for me around aircraft, or around ordinance, or around electronics. Color blind sailors are restricted to paperwork, supply work, chipping paint, and other unexciting work. I didn't want to go home, so I took a job in supply.
Has bad color vision hurt me? I don't guess so. I've had a happy, adventurous life. Some doors were closed to me, but I'm so damned good that I just opened up other doors, and found good times there instead. So, I didn't get to hang bombs and missiles on aircraft - instead, I counted beans, bolts, and bullets on a destroyer. I had a great time sight seeing around the world all the same. And, I paid my dues along the way.
Color vision probably won't be a big deal for your son, either. He won't be a world renowned electronics engineer, most likely. But, there is a whole world of other things that he can excel at. Maybe he'll be like me, and race motorcycles against the cops. Oh - you probably didn't want to hear that. Don't worry - not all color blind people are as depraved as I am - he'll probably do well. Normally, it's just not a big deal.
(now you are probably asking yourself just exactly how serious I am, LMAO)
Well - I think that I made it fairly clear that I had seen robots doing roughly the same job that these robots are designed to do. I think that my post was less binary than you imply. There are groups doing pretty amazing things with robots today. When they untethered that dog/wolf robot, that was actually newsworthy. When it first learned to walk over rubble, that was then newsworthy. Prior to that, when it first learned to walk, that was then newsworthy.
The reason that I didn't consider this story to be especially newsworthy is, the tasks that these particular robots are performing were already being done by robots a lifetime ago. (My sons are all in their twenties, so twenty years is a "lifetime".)
Among other newsworthy robot stories being published today, are the automated facial recognition stories. And, another story about identifying High Occupancy Vehicle scofflaws. Bomb disposal and ordinance will stay interesting for a long time to come, even if the robots don't get a whole lot better at the job.
Picking stuff off a shelf, while navigating a nice clean, smooth even concrete floor? I'm sorry, my friend, but I can't see the newsworthiness here.
I would have found this story more interesting if some young parent were gushing over their toddler's newly learned ability to pick stuff off of shelves, and carry it across the room, and place it on a table. "Junior just LOVES to help Mother set the table for dinner!"
Robots are coming of age now. How much interest would be generated, if someone published a story about his/her fifteen year old daughter learning to move cutlery from a drawer, onto the dining room table? Not so much, huh?
Maybe you can answer your own question, if you'll answer a couple other questions first.
Who, exactly, would decide to dispatch 10,000 robots to Nepal?
Who, exactly, has the resources to actually send them?
Who, exactly, has the AUTHORITY to make that decision, and to appropriate resources to that mission?
And, finally, how, exactly, would that mission benefit those people who own that authority and those resources?
There are a number of conspiracy theories floating around, regarding the depopulation of the earth. Taken all together, the general idea is, once the wealthy and ruling classes no longer have any use for the masses, they are just going to get rid of the masses. I don't buy into any of those theories - but a thinking person should do a little thinking before he dismisses them out of hand.
I'll grant that having those robots available would be beneficial to the masses, but no real benefit would accrue to the ruling classes.
I'm color blind, or color impaired. Quite naturally, I don't really see pink most of the time. Hot pink, in bright sunlight, yeah, but there are shades that I just don't see. I'm not sure if the robots were pink or not - they were a light color, could have been beige, white, or some light shade of pink.
Mary Kay does run pink Freightliners and trailers up and down the road though. Some of them are dark enough that I can actually see the pink, others are lighter, and they just look white to me. Most of the trailers look white to me, with a pink stripe down the side.
This is what Google offered when I did an image search.
https://www.google.com/search?...
At LEAST fifteen years ago, more like twenty years ago, I delivered freight to a Mary Kay plant that had this. Perhaps those robots were less advanced than Amazon's robots - but then, Mary Kay has had plenty of time to improve on their robots.
I'll be honest - I didn't have any opportunity to just stand around and watch those robots, or time to interrogate the people working at the plant. And, no way in hell would anyone let me play with those robots. All that I can tell you for sure, is that robots were wandering the plant floor, carrying articles from hither to thither. Some would disappear in between the aisles of warehouse shelves, carrying a box of something, and reappear empty. Others would go between the shelves empty, and come back with something. Most would then aim themselves through the doors, into the plant proper, presumably to deliver those items to a work station, or to get items from a work station.
Oh - yeah - it's wonderful. We're moving closer to that imagined post-prosperity world, huh? I'm not believing that the ruling class is going to share any of that prosperity with the masses, but, yeah, we're moving closer to it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
Reporting on the trial - testimony establishes pretty clearly that NoW did indeed hack into the telephone.
So - the phone automagically deletes messages that have been listened to, after 72 hours. NoW hacker listens to messages - 72 hours later, they are erased. Yeah - that would definitely screw up the police investigation, now wouldn't it? Intentionally or not, NoW was helping the deletion schedule to move along, and delete mails, giving every appearance that Milly might be alive.
That's not exactly the story I thought that I heard. Lemme try to find something . . .
You're right, in that the Guardian's article comes up first in a Google search - http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...
Here, the Guardian again, backpedaling on that story - http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...
The wikipedia entry seems to confirm what you say - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... specifically, "Dowler's phone automatically deleted messages 72 hours after being listened to.[47]" HOWEVER, "in September 2011 it was reported that the Dowler family had been offered £2m in personal damages.[49]"
Now, is it true, or is it not true, that Murdoch ALSO paid off celebrities, in the same manner, after having "hacked" into their phone/email/other accounts? It sure looks like the Guardian called it correctly - to me, anyway.
Brief statement that falls in line with my point of view - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b5d... "Until now the paper’s illegal actions, while costly and damaging to its reputation, were largely seen as being targeted at celebrities and politicians. The News of the World has been battling to draw a line under a scandal that has already seen two people sent to prison."
I'll admit that it's possible that my take on the story is not entirely accurate. But - unless you come up with something convincing, I'll continue to hold that view. Murdoch's minions were making a lot of money by "hacking" into celebritie's accounts, with his tacit approval, if not his clearly stated approval. He was making more money off those tabloid articles than he was spending on settlements. IMHO - Murdoch's boys and girls did exactly the same thing with Milly Dowler's phone, that they had already done with other phones.
But, right or wrong, Murdoch is still a freaking scumbag. So are all of his people associated with the case.
The post office photographs and tracks every piece of mail. The other part of that equation hasn't been publicized yet - they have cameras with facial recognition software focused on all their mailboxes.
No, snailmail is not anonymous. It probably was anonymous around 2000. Almost definitely anonymous in 1990. Not any more!
I like it when someone is able to cut to the chase so quickly. Murdoch publications keeps no secrets, unless it serves their purposes. Even then - they fail. I mean, they hacked a dead girl's telephone, but couldn't keep THAT secret, could they? How in hell they gonna keep MY hacking secret?
Best thing is, don't share your secrets with Murdoch.
I'm sitting here, trying to think of one single liberal politico who was competent at anything. All that comes to mind, is Chapaquidik Ted's rum-running dad. Was the old man a liberal?
I thought it was '123456'. Maybe they have TWO WIFI routers?
Excellent post. Excellent. Unfortunately, someone has rewritten history since we have been in school, and these kids are learning something else entirely.
Neo-nazi. Why don't you listen to the words of mid-eastern Muslim leaders who still deny the holocaust, while at the same time praising Hitler. Pull your head out of your arse. Islam is a threat to life around the world. It is at least a great a threat as Nazism was, or the Soviet.
The answer to your question is rather simple. Those "SJW's" embrace anything and everything that tends to weaken America. They hate Christians so much, that they will sacrifice anything, anyone to get at them. They hate the nuclear family just as much. If you appear to be somewhat "average" in any way, they regard you as part of the problem, and they'll sacrifice your ass along with all the rest. They HATE AMERICA!
Islam hates America, so the so-called SJW's find common cause with Islam.
You, AC, get an "attaboy" for at least attempting to understand the situation. You didn't write enough to convince me that you REALLY understand, but you've made a good start.
You're a complete idiot. Christians ran the colonies, and then this country for about 300 years. We didn't have any inquisitions. We had one witch trial that I'm aware of, and the CHURCH ITSELF moved to ensure that it wouldn't happen again. Complete fucking idiot.
Who gives a flying FUCK that the terms are offensive? WTF are you, a Muslim? Nobody gives a damn.
If you're NOT a Muslim, but instead, just another idiot bleeding heart liberal, maybe you should get a bit of education.
http://chersonandmolschky.com/...
https://www.google.dk/search?q...
Holy fuck - who'da thunk of all that shit? Now I'm wondering how in the hell any of us over age 50 managed to grow up at all!
Stupid motherfucker, huh? Think about it. I can accomplish anything that you can, without the telephone. Now who's stupid?
You're at the mall, and want to look up specs? Big fucking deal - you're a spur of the moment shopper. You see some shiny gadget, you feel like you must have one. DUHHHH!! Already you're an idiot. BUT - let's just suppose that the shiny thing really is somehow unique or something. What I do is, I go home and research the damned thing on my DESKTOP WORKSTATION. See? I have the same functionality that you do, it's just sitting on my desktop. I don't need the instant gratification of looking it all up in the store.
Oh - once I''m sitting at home, that "impulse buying" thing is long behind me. I can also shop for similar devices online, locate the best specs, the best price, and order it for delivery right to my door.
You know, AC, I might have had a tiny bit of respect for your post, had you shown any respect at all. But, I'm a stupid motherfucker. Yeah, uh-huh. Here's a Kleenex - wipe some of that drool off your face, alright? Then, you can go sit in front of the window, and watch the dust motes floating in the sunbeam.
No - in other words, the man knows how to live life without an electronic nanny in his pocket.