I understand liking pork and all but there is a limit. It's a $300,000,000 bridge for like 20 people. If it was possible to get a bridge built from California to Hawaii for that much I don't think it could get passed.
Besides, isn't their no-state-income-tax/sales-tax and $1000 per year per citizen oil proffits enough (which would only go UP if ANOIR was opened)?
I think what really needs to happen is a fix to redistricting. Both parties drew things up to make their incumbants as safe as possible. Some state (or maybe a few) have gone through fights on this and decided to (IIRC) automically re-draw districts every 10 years by computer in such a way as to make them as competitive as possible (or something like that). That way you can't get these idiots who sit there for 40 years and lose touch with reality.
Term limits would work also. Two terms for the Senate, 6 for the house. To continue past that you must get 85% of the vote or higher.
The problem with both ideas is that the very people who would vote to put the law in place are the very people who DON'T want the laws to be passed. It's a conflict of interest. As far as I know there is no other way to get them into law other than a Supreme Court case. I don't think the President could dictate that (that would give him too much power over the legislature). People can't submit laws for congress and they can't get it put on the national ballot as a refferendum. At least, as far s I know.
I think it's terrible too. But reading the article something else struck me.
Doesn't it give someone entirely too much power to let a single Senator be able to block and entire bill indefinatly and anonymously? Isn't the whole point of a body like the Senate to make multiple people have to agree on something so one lone quack can't screw things up like this?
Alaskins... PLEASE tell me you are doing something about this guy.
This is sort of what I'm thinking. I'd love to program games. I just graduated and got a job doing programming and it's quite nice. As much as I'd love to work on games, I know it isn't going to happen. My job pays well and has great flexability. If I get a job in the industry I'll be worked until I'm about to pass out for semi-reasonable pay.
I also think those kind of degrees are useless. That kind of thing is best as a minor with a real CS degree at most. I came out of DeVry just as they started rolling out the tracks system (Game/Simulation, Forensics, BioMed, *insert-cool-thing-here*) and they are very focused degrees. You get EXACTLY what you are looking for, and I don't think that's a good thing. Yes there are some general courses, but not nearly as many as under my degree (which was phased out into the tracks). The idea of a school for this just worries me, I think it would be an ITT Tech and the degree wouldn't be worth too much. I doubt many of these places are even accredited.
Now the art program mentioned at the start of the article seems great to me. It's a real art program, only with an emphasys (later on) on art for games. That seems useful.
If you have to get into the industry, my best guess at how to do it would be to get a real CS degree, then go to one of those school.
The other problem with getting into games is location. When I tired to look up a bunch of game companies, like 85% were near Seattle or Silicon Valley, with another 5%-10% near Dallas. If you live Ohio, you'll be going a long way to look for a job.
Fair enough, but while running a ferry is hard (and requires training becuase it can be physically dangerous to yourself and passengers) pressing the edit button on Wikipedia isn't.
Besides, are you telling me that no one at that company has a kid "smart enough" to edit Wikipedia even if the adult didn't know how? I know how this would work in my house. "Hey, how do I edit this Wikitingjinary"? All of a sudden, look, they are editing.
The challenge level to the average person who knows nothing about either is not equal. Wikipedia is easier, especially with children around to show you how.
I disagree, I really like them. They are fun little ads that draw attention to the brand. They are not "You must buy a Mac", they get you interested to check Macs out. I also disagree about the Mac. I don't think he looks like a slacker, I think he looks "cool"; mainly I think he simply looks better than the PC who looks uptite (and since PCs are business machines that have been put in homes...).
I also have to disgree with the "Windows runs fine out of the box" assertion. Installing Windows is for most users a nightmare, which is why it's a good thing it's pre-installed. Still you turn on that computer and it asks you some questions (like the Mac does) and then you're ready to use it. Or not. You plug in a USB drive and Windows has to install a driver (which it already has at this point). You plug in that new printer that came with your computer? Chances are the driver is NOT installed and you have to go through that (including the scary "Windows needs a driver!" dialog box). Macs are all-in-one these days (except the pro towers) where as most PCs aren't. That means plenty of confusing cables to plug in (you don't think they are confusing? Neither do I but 80+% of people seem to).
Your digital camera works fine with Windows? Mine asked for a driver. Didn't need to do that with my Mac. I tried to plug my Digital Rebel into my parent's laptop the other day. It was recognized immediatly (good), but when the piece of software I wanted to use tried to load picutres, nothing happened (like there was nothing on it, using Picasa). With the dialog that poppped up ("Windows has detected pictures...") clicking on the choice to copy pictures to the computer.. did nothing. The dialog box just stayed there. It wasn't frozen, it just didn't work. After an hour of fiddling and trying different drivers I just plugged the dumb thing in my Mac.
Windows isn't hard and it is WAY better than it was in 3.1 or 95, but it's not as easy as a Mac.
Then there are the other concerns. There are no viruses right now, there is no spyware. There is a local radio show here where once or twice a month they get the "Computer Guys" on (one PC guy, one Mac guy). Every time I hear it someone calls in about getting rid of spyware or viruses. Almost every time someone calls in saying they want a computer but they are affraid of the spyware and viruses and such.
You have to remember these ads aren't targeted at very savy users. They aren't really targeted at decent users. They are targeted at... to drag out that old chestnut... Aunt Tillie.
I should also mention that I don't think I've talked to a single person who doesn't like the commercials. Everyone I've heard from is either indifferent or likes them. My little sister and most of her friends (14 or so) love 'em. The only place I've run into people calling them mean is online.
Python is a true scripting language. While PHP was designed for the web ("PHP Hypertext Processor" as it is now), Python does "everything". For a GUI it has all the usual bindings available (QT, GTK, Win32, etc). Getting students to program a GUI is going to be very tough unless you use VB, as sad as that fact is. GUI programming is just very tough. Hypercard is about as easy as I've ever seen it. It's scripting language (Hypertalk) was also very English like. It's really too bad Hypercard is basically out of the question (feasibility wise). I've used one of the Hypercard wannabes (called Toolbook) and it was just TERRIBLE. I frankly don't hold any hope you'll find a good one. Plus they will be obscure and probably cost money (as opposed to things like Logo and Python that you can get for free so students can play at home).
I understand why you say graphics are dead important. For the game suggestion you could write all the graphics parts (like I suggested writing all the other non-logic parts). That said, for most games (like the checkers example, or card games) a text interface would be easy and work very well (though its not sexy).
For graphics, what I said above in reply to someone else is probably one of the best suggestions... Logo. It's easy to program, but pure graphics. That said, it's obviously a different animal (as is Mindstorms, which would also a good idea). But with logo you could do everything from letting this experiment to letting them try for something you suggest (draw your name, draw a house, whatever).
There was a something I remember from a few years ago that was designed to make it easy to learn programming that I can remember, but I don't remember the name. It was all in Java and let you make little robots to fight each other (simulated on the computer). It had all the stuff you needed (to find out about your environment, move, fire, etc) and all you had to do was write the logic (that's kind of where my idea came from). Then you could watch your robot fight others. That kind of thing would work well, but I doubt it would appeal to the girls.
Logo is another excellent suggestion. It has many basic control structures (like FOR loops) and is also very visual (which is good). With a few simple commands it's easy to make geometric shapes, snowflakes, or just color the screen with a neat pattern. For a plus, you could have them do assignments like draw a square, draw the letter "R", draw your name, draw a house, whatever.
For ease of results, Logo is probably the best suggestion I've seen yet.
Of course it's not a general purpose language (like Python, which I suggested in another comment). But it will get the kids making little programs fast that they get to control and they can make do what they want easily.
I'd second this. I cut my teeth on Hypercard. You could make graphical programs trivially, and it was a fantastic program. It had some problems by the time I used it (System 7) such as it was only B&W and adding color made the stack uneditable.
What would I teach them today? That's a tough one. I wouldn't do VB (that's a nightmare, plus the IDE is complex). I'd say Python.
My suggestion would be to get them started so it feels like they are doing something. Write the shell to a program or a game (checkers? Whatever). Have it handle all the logic of making the moves and updating the state and such, as well as printing out the board and asking/checking for moves. Then write a stub function to do the logic. They can come up with their ideas on how to play, and fill in that function (using your provided functions). Then they have a working program that they can change. You could also write a little less and teach them how to print out the board and get input and validate it (those can be walk-though lessons).
Checkers may be a bit complex, but that's the kind of idea I'm talking about. Something where it's conceptually simple and they can notice that they made a difference in a piece of software. It could be the logic on what to do in a poker hand, blackjack, which card to play in Uno, whatever.
Unless the kids are interested on their own, basic programming lessons (this is a loop, today we'll print the numbers 1 to 5) probably won't go over to well. You'll have to touch on that but giving them something they can get their feet wet in first would be my idea. Once that happens, if this continues you could walk them through writing EVERYTHING on their next (albeit simpler) program.
Bonus points if it is something where you can make their algorithms play against each-other. Go look at POTM and some of their contests. If you supplied everything but the decision logic then many of those would work well for the students, but specifically the game-like ones.
As for Python, I recommend it for a few reasons. It's free, it has an interactive command line, and I think it's "simple". By that I mean that there aren't a lot of superfluous words (Java can be kind of wordy). Python runs on any platform. It's syntax is clean, and the indenting makes it easy to follow (as well as teaching good habits).
I'd worry about the VB IDE being intimidating (as well as I'm not a VB fan). Java is nice but I think it's a little complex for a starting language for kids. BASIC is too antiquated, Python is almost as simple but much more powerful.
But I second the parent's post. HyperCard was perfect. It's a real shame it's gone. I wonder if I would have been interested in computers as much without it. I later tried BASIC (which of course got me nowhere). It took me years and years and years and years before I got to know enough that I could start writing things like I used to in Hypercard (due to the complexities of GUI programming).
I've got a Mac, I've had it for about 18 months now and I love it. I especially love the command prompt and all the Unix utilities. That said, I agree with the decision they made. Being able to tinker and repair the laptop, as well as write kernel changes and such, is a major boon. Children will be able to learn much more about the computer if they are interested. As much as I love my Mac, it doesn't compared to Linux in a few areas. There is much more information available through some of the interfaces on Linux (/dev and such, for example) than I can find on my Mac. There is quite a bit of documentation on writing drivers and kernel changes for Linux, but next to none for OS X save Apple's documentation (which I find to be a little sparse).
Don't forget that while OS X runs well on older Macs, a custom slimmed-down Linux will run much faster and use far fewer resources. OS X is just not designed to run on 128MB of RAM by any stretch, let alone less so applications still have room to run. Frankly I think Jobs knew that OS X was incompatible with what the OLPC people were planning (mostly hardware wise, but also in ideals).
I'm not surprised that RedHat is the distro chosen (especially considering that they are a sponsor), but I don't think that's why they didn't go with OS X.
Sounds like a good idea to me. While having a headphone jack would be very useful (listen to language lessons without disturbing others, including learning to read software), the microphone jack too (VOIP idea the article posits) is good, and the display upgrade is VERY good (especially on the 'net at large where most websites assume a minimum screen of 1024x768), I think the SD card is the killer feature.
Before this change, the storage on the machine was fixed. If you wanted to get more storage you would have to plug in an external USB drive (flash, hard drive, CD-RW, whatever). Now with SD cards you can expand the storage in unit, without having a USB key hang off the side of the machine. You can add up to 2 GB (4+ with newer standards) this way. While a 2 GB card is expensive now, it won't always be that way, and smaller cards (say 128 MB) are cheap (if I can get one at a drug store for $17, then people out to be able to get them pretty cheap, especially used). 128MB would be a 25% increase in the system's storage.
Even 64 MB will hold a TON of text, especially if you compress it.
I see this as a good thing. Let's not forget that the OLPC was to be sold at a loss (initially). So for all we know the new features increased the cost $100. They may not have increased costs at all and they just want to lose less so they can make more of 'em.
Hopefully, not only will this help people, some of the ideas will get used in mainstream laptops. If they can do that for $200-$250 (guessing on true cost), then they should be able to make me a nice 1600:900 (or so) LCD that I can view outside, inside, and won't kill a battery really fast. Considering how much power LCDs use (and how unviewable many are in direct sunlight) even a little improvement would go a long way.
And none of this counts the effecting giving tons of kids something as accessible and hackable as a C64 with the power to surf the 'net, be portable, and have an absolute ton of processing power. Considering what came out of C64 hackers (who had a vastly slower chip, vastly less memory, and no internet to get help from) I bet we will see some amazingly talented people as a result of this program.
I've been using it for a while now (a year and a half or so). The biggest thing I should warn you about is that if you are a early adopter, you may have a problem. What I mean is that when Tiger came out, it took a few months before they released a version that was compatible with iSync 2.0. Since Leopard is going to have iSync 3.0, I'm guessing something like that may happen again.
That said, I've had a Dell Axim X50v for two years now. The hardware is nice. The OS (Windows Mobile 2003) is not. They made some very odd choices (no real way to quit applications without a 3rd party tool or just "force quit"), Pocket IE is a total joke. Network configuration (if you have wireless) is terrible (they were supposed to fix that in the new version that I don't have). If you had to sync to Outlook I bet the device would be great. At this point, if my PDA died I think I'd buy the cheapest Palm with BlueTooth I could (looks like that would be an E2 if I went with a new device). I don't know if the newer version of Windows Mobile is any better, but I was very disappointed by the version I have. I used Windows CE 1.0 (HP 300LX represent!) and I felt like things had moved backwards. The calendar program is ugly. The mail program seems to be designed to work only by having Outlook on the desktop do the heavy lifting. The interface isn't nearly as nice as my old Newton was.
Also, installing applications tends to be a pain, ESPECIALLY from a Mac.
There is nothing wrong with Missing Sync, it's all complications of Microsoft's choices.
Where is a new Newton, Apple? We need you now more than ever.
Try 'em both. You may like using one more than another. You can look into other options (Sharp Zarus, an older iPaq with Linux, etc) too. Or you could just use a fancy cell phone that will let you sync such stuff to your computer.
I should mention that there is (or at least was, I don't follow it) another application to let one sync Windows Mobile devices to Macs. I don't remember the name but it shouldn't be hard to find.
I don't know, I think this is a good thing. If people want to kill themselves let them. There are already tons of people working on diet and anti-cholesterol drugs and such to "help" those people.
But what if you eat well and such? Something like this could be very important. You may think you are eating healthy, but what if you could take a test and find out that your diet needed more of X because that would reduce your risk of Y which is high because of genes A, B, and C?
Also, don't forget that it's easier to convince people to do something like eat healthy if you can point to a difinitive test and say "You have 3x the risk of heart disease even if you eat healthy, so imagine what your risk is the way you eat" than "Don't eat that it's bad for you."
Many people's diets and such are causing problems, but does that mean until we fix that we should ignore the other causes of those problems and the healthy eaters?
Well, there are a couple of things. First, they probably want to make sure it works well and can integrate correctly (being a default browser and such, they may have changed that API). But they also want to make sure it doesn't trigger any bugs. This may include avoiding known bugs, or finding new ones. What if FireFox was written correctly but happened to trigger some obscure bug that would cause your network connection to get dropped or stalled whenever you looked at a page over 100k or something like that.
It's important to find bugs that aren't triggerable yet. It's MORE important to find bugs that ARE triggerable.
Never. Too much NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome for that. I think one of the other posters is right. FireFox is getting popular and if it doesn't work with Vista (either intentionally or not) they will get tons of complaints ("Vista broke my InternetFox thing", "They are trying to crush FireFox", etc.). FireFox is so popular that they have to make sure it works. The only difference between it and some other program they'll do that for (Sims/Sim 2) is that FireFox is FOSS so we hear about it (where they have done this with Sims/Sims 2 and we don't hear a peep).
I've only been watching for two years or so. I've seen all the past episodes (thanks to Netflix and DVDs). I adored the 200th episode, I thought it was hilarious. I read this last night, and the blurb blamed the lack of Battlestar Galactica (as a lead in) and stiff compitition (Monk on USA, also fantastic). It's really too bad. They had just got a good new badguy (the Ori) too. Plus in the lead in retrospective thing before the 200th episode the actor who plays Daniel mentioned that he was supposed to have something happen to his character this season. Not dieing, not ascending, something inbetween.
The problem is that they were not anonymised enough. They took out the user IDs, but they replaced them with numbers. As we've all seen, there was still enough there to identify people that way. To really sanitize it they would have had to remove that part so you couldn't tell which searches were together and which were from seperate users, but that would have made the data less usefull.
They would also have to remove all the searches that are to specific like "birth certificate for Joe B. McWhatever SSN:123-45-6789" and other such stuff which would have been a major burden too.
It makes PERFECT sense to have them sitting in a warehouse. Remember the PS2? This is going to be worse. They need stock to sell. If they had any brains and had the ability, they would be cranking them out so they could sell them. Remember that when they got for $2000 on eBay, Sony only gets the origonal $500 or $600. They want more to sell, and making them now would allow that.
Despite all the (sometimes tremendous) screw ups around the PS3, I don't think they are THAT stupid. They aren't making them becuase they can't. The design isn't final, there are cell chip yield problems, they need more blu-ray drives, whatever. If they could make them, I think they would.
I know shortages get free press, but they will get enough of that anyway. If they can make an extra 1,000,000 units I don't think it would stop a shortage if that was distributed world wide. There would still be a shortage, but they would sell more.
Unless they are holding back because despite their predictions they don't think a $600 toy will sell well (especially compared to a 360 that seems very similar and is chaper, and the Wii which is innovative and MUCH cheaper).
Receiving stolen property, they are guilty. If they bought a nice laptop for $200 then they had to know it was stolen (especially since it probably had tons of business documents on it, if it's phoning home it hasn't been wiped). I doubt they bought it in good faith. If they DID (say they paid a decent amount that would buy them such a laptop) then they could get out of the charges by pointing out where they got it. I doubt the DA would press charges on them if they pointed out where they got it from and would testify to that fact.
If they bought it from a pawn shop or used computer shop or something, that shop is liable (I think) and they may still not have claim to the laptop. Both should have questioned the sale of this laptop with all the business stuff still on it (and even more.. selling it like that).
Still, crooks are, by and large, idiots. I would bet the original thief (or a direct relative/girlfriend/boyfriend) has the thing.
Either way, you would think the cops would be all over this one. Grand theft (the laptop cost over $1000 new, right?), known location (more or less, but it keeps phoning home), easy catch, and 100:1 odds that this is NOT the first/only crime the guy has committed (probably has a few other hot items near him).
I agree with one of the other comments. Go to the media. "His laptop was stolen, and he knew where it was... but the police wouldn't do a thing. Why your stuff isn't safe... tonight at 10." Or sue the department (that always gets things moving, just the threat with a nasty-gram should do). Or go talk to the DA. A case like this (likely a slam dunk) you would think they would want to take. They probably don't know about it and could get the police to go do something.
Yes, my comment was technically off topic, but it was modded up for a reason. I wrote it for a reason.
I like my DirecTiVo and I am really ticked off at them for ditching TiVo. My comment was written to remind people that DirecTV used to have TiVos which they abandoned sale of (they still support them, thankfully), that nothing is as good as a TiVo (not that I've seen yet, most have been laughably bad), and that DVR things for DirecTV users have gotten worse since you can't get a true TiVo (unless you are willing to pay through the nose for the HD TiVos that this new receiver is meant to replace).
It's not an answer, but it was a valid point that I felt fit there. DirecTV abandoned great units and replaced them with units that were perhaps adequate. Why did they do this? Almost certainly profit. You know what? I'd gladly pay 3x the DVR fee if I knew that I could get new TiVos from them that would continue to work (as opposed to mind which is basically on a death watch while they roll-out MPEG4).
how ergonomic? (TiVo's a hard act to follow on this one) - Fantastic
how often does the machine crash and burn, or just plain lock up? (any comcast DVR users out there?) - Never
how well does it handle season passes with options of first showing, multiple channel, etc. (once again, TiVo is a hard act to follow on this one) - Excellent
how well does it do video? any mosaics?, dropped frames? - Perfect quality, just like my normal satellite receivers
are there things like "wish lists"? (TiVo does this wonderfully) - Yep, very handy
and, since we're talking about TiVo here too (apparently by my post), are there any impending lawsuits and injunctions against DirectTV for infringment upon TiVo's patents? - Doubt it
Of course, I have a DirecTiVo... which they no longer sell. The fact they made them is why I don't think DirecTV will be sued. TiVo still gets a ton of money from DirecTiVo users.
I love my DirecTiVo. I think it's the best TiVo that was made at the time. Pure digital quality, tons of channels, Dolby Digital, record two shows at once, etc. It's a fantastic little machine. No home media and such, but that's OK, the dual tuners more than make up for that.
But you can't buy them any more from DirecTV. And DirecTV is moving towards MPEG4 which means my box is obsolete.
I plan to stay with my box as long as I can. When it no longer works, then I know exactly what I'll do. I enjoy DirecTV so if I can use one of the new Series 3 TiVos with DirecTV I will. If I can't do that and Dish starts offering true TiVos, I'll go there. Otherwise, I'll go to cable with a Series 3 TiVo.
I've had DirecTV for years and I loved the service. I didn't think anything would get me off it. Then they sold me a TiVo. They sold me the very device that changed my loyalty and will probably cause me to dump their service some time in the future.
I still think they seriously botched the whole TiVo deal. They should have advertised them. You should have been able to get a DirecTiVo for $50 on new accounts, or even better for free. Practically force 'em on the consumer. Consumers would have loved it. They would have struck a big blow against Dish. Their customers would be very loyal.
"Why pay $300 for a TiVo when you can get one from DirecTV for free that will record two things at once?"
They had their chance. They screwed up. Even if it was a 6 month promotion, they could have signed up enough people to make a ton of money off the monthly fees and have so many people tell their friends about it that it would encourage more sign ups later.
DirecTV: Not wanting me as a future customer for over 2 years
When I move to a new place, my guess is that I'll switch to cable and buy a series 3. The fact is the main reason I like DirecTV is because my local cable company has been terrible ever since Comcrud bought them. The local channels look better with an over the air antenna some times, and the cable channels look just as bad (if not like a VCR with bad tracking). If the area I move to has decent cable service, then my main reason for going with DirecTV will be gone. Combine that with my loss-of-TiVo and they will lose me as a customer.
I don't want a DVR, I want a TiVo.
Sorry about this long post, this is a touchy subject
Slashdot Mirror
I understand liking pork and all but there is a limit. It's a $300,000,000 bridge for like 20 people. If it was possible to get a bridge built from California to Hawaii for that much I don't think it could get passed.
Besides, isn't their no-state-income-tax/sales-tax and $1000 per year per citizen oil proffits enough (which would only go UP if ANOIR was opened)?
I think what really needs to happen is a fix to redistricting. Both parties drew things up to make their incumbants as safe as possible. Some state (or maybe a few) have gone through fights on this and decided to (IIRC) automically re-draw districts every 10 years by computer in such a way as to make them as competitive as possible (or something like that). That way you can't get these idiots who sit there for 40 years and lose touch with reality.
Term limits would work also. Two terms for the Senate, 6 for the house. To continue past that you must get 85% of the vote or higher.
The problem with both ideas is that the very people who would vote to put the law in place are the very people who DON'T want the laws to be passed. It's a conflict of interest. As far as I know there is no other way to get them into law other than a Supreme Court case. I don't think the President could dictate that (that would give him too much power over the legislature). People can't submit laws for congress and they can't get it put on the national ballot as a refferendum. At least, as far s I know.
I think it's terrible too. But reading the article something else struck me.
Doesn't it give someone entirely too much power to let a single Senator be able to block and entire bill indefinatly and anonymously? Isn't the whole point of a body like the Senate to make multiple people have to agree on something so one lone quack can't screw things up like this?
Alaskins... PLEASE tell me you are doing something about this guy.
This is sort of what I'm thinking. I'd love to program games. I just graduated and got a job doing programming and it's quite nice. As much as I'd love to work on games, I know it isn't going to happen. My job pays well and has great flexability. If I get a job in the industry I'll be worked until I'm about to pass out for semi-reasonable pay.
I also think those kind of degrees are useless. That kind of thing is best as a minor with a real CS degree at most. I came out of DeVry just as they started rolling out the tracks system (Game/Simulation, Forensics, BioMed, *insert-cool-thing-here*) and they are very focused degrees. You get EXACTLY what you are looking for, and I don't think that's a good thing. Yes there are some general courses, but not nearly as many as under my degree (which was phased out into the tracks). The idea of a school for this just worries me, I think it would be an ITT Tech and the degree wouldn't be worth too much. I doubt many of these places are even accredited.
Now the art program mentioned at the start of the article seems great to me. It's a real art program, only with an emphasys (later on) on art for games. That seems useful.
If you have to get into the industry, my best guess at how to do it would be to get a real CS degree, then go to one of those school.
The other problem with getting into games is location. When I tired to look up a bunch of game companies, like 85% were near Seattle or Silicon Valley, with another 5%-10% near Dallas. If you live Ohio, you'll be going a long way to look for a job.
Fair enough, but while running a ferry is hard (and requires training becuase it can be physically dangerous to yourself and passengers) pressing the edit button on Wikipedia isn't.
Besides, are you telling me that no one at that company has a kid "smart enough" to edit Wikipedia even if the adult didn't know how? I know how this would work in my house. "Hey, how do I edit this Wikitingjinary"? All of a sudden, look, they are editing.
The challenge level to the average person who knows nothing about either is not equal. Wikipedia is easier, especially with children around to show you how.
Random guess: by definition Windows can't infect it's self.
I disagree, I really like them. They are fun little ads that draw attention to the brand. They are not "You must buy a Mac", they get you interested to check Macs out. I also disagree about the Mac. I don't think he looks like a slacker, I think he looks "cool"; mainly I think he simply looks better than the PC who looks uptite (and since PCs are business machines that have been put in homes...).
I also have to disgree with the "Windows runs fine out of the box" assertion. Installing Windows is for most users a nightmare, which is why it's a good thing it's pre-installed. Still you turn on that computer and it asks you some questions (like the Mac does) and then you're ready to use it. Or not. You plug in a USB drive and Windows has to install a driver (which it already has at this point). You plug in that new printer that came with your computer? Chances are the driver is NOT installed and you have to go through that (including the scary "Windows needs a driver!" dialog box). Macs are all-in-one these days (except the pro towers) where as most PCs aren't. That means plenty of confusing cables to plug in (you don't think they are confusing? Neither do I but 80+% of people seem to).
Your digital camera works fine with Windows? Mine asked for a driver. Didn't need to do that with my Mac. I tried to plug my Digital Rebel into my parent's laptop the other day. It was recognized immediatly (good), but when the piece of software I wanted to use tried to load picutres, nothing happened (like there was nothing on it, using Picasa). With the dialog that poppped up ("Windows has detected pictures...") clicking on the choice to copy pictures to the computer.. did nothing. The dialog box just stayed there. It wasn't frozen, it just didn't work. After an hour of fiddling and trying different drivers I just plugged the dumb thing in my Mac.
Windows isn't hard and it is WAY better than it was in 3.1 or 95, but it's not as easy as a Mac.
Then there are the other concerns. There are no viruses right now, there is no spyware. There is a local radio show here where once or twice a month they get the "Computer Guys" on (one PC guy, one Mac guy). Every time I hear it someone calls in about getting rid of spyware or viruses. Almost every time someone calls in saying they want a computer but they are affraid of the spyware and viruses and such.
You have to remember these ads aren't targeted at very savy users. They aren't really targeted at decent users. They are targeted at... to drag out that old chestnut... Aunt Tillie.
I should also mention that I don't think I've talked to a single person who doesn't like the commercials. Everyone I've heard from is either indifferent or likes them. My little sister and most of her friends (14 or so) love 'em. The only place I've run into people calling them mean is online.
Python is a true scripting language. While PHP was designed for the web ("PHP Hypertext Processor" as it is now), Python does "everything". For a GUI it has all the usual bindings available (QT, GTK, Win32, etc). Getting students to program a GUI is going to be very tough unless you use VB, as sad as that fact is. GUI programming is just very tough. Hypercard is about as easy as I've ever seen it. It's scripting language (Hypertalk) was also very English like. It's really too bad Hypercard is basically out of the question (feasibility wise). I've used one of the Hypercard wannabes (called Toolbook) and it was just TERRIBLE. I frankly don't hold any hope you'll find a good one. Plus they will be obscure and probably cost money (as opposed to things like Logo and Python that you can get for free so students can play at home).
I understand why you say graphics are dead important. For the game suggestion you could write all the graphics parts (like I suggested writing all the other non-logic parts). That said, for most games (like the checkers example, or card games) a text interface would be easy and work very well (though its not sexy).
For graphics, what I said above in reply to someone else is probably one of the best suggestions... Logo. It's easy to program, but pure graphics. That said, it's obviously a different animal (as is Mindstorms, which would also a good idea). But with logo you could do everything from letting this experiment to letting them try for something you suggest (draw your name, draw a house, whatever).
There was a something I remember from a few years ago that was designed to make it easy to learn programming that I can remember, but I don't remember the name. It was all in Java and let you make little robots to fight each other (simulated on the computer). It had all the stuff you needed (to find out about your environment, move, fire, etc) and all you had to do was write the logic (that's kind of where my idea came from). Then you could watch your robot fight others. That kind of thing would work well, but I doubt it would appeal to the girls.
Logo is another excellent suggestion. It has many basic control structures (like FOR loops) and is also very visual (which is good). With a few simple commands it's easy to make geometric shapes, snowflakes, or just color the screen with a neat pattern. For a plus, you could have them do assignments like draw a square, draw the letter "R", draw your name, draw a house, whatever.
For ease of results, Logo is probably the best suggestion I've seen yet.
Of course it's not a general purpose language (like Python, which I suggested in another comment). But it will get the kids making little programs fast that they get to control and they can make do what they want easily.
I'd second this. I cut my teeth on Hypercard. You could make graphical programs trivially, and it was a fantastic program. It had some problems by the time I used it (System 7) such as it was only B&W and adding color made the stack uneditable.
What would I teach them today? That's a tough one. I wouldn't do VB (that's a nightmare, plus the IDE is complex). I'd say Python.
My suggestion would be to get them started so it feels like they are doing something. Write the shell to a program or a game (checkers? Whatever). Have it handle all the logic of making the moves and updating the state and such, as well as printing out the board and asking/checking for moves. Then write a stub function to do the logic. They can come up with their ideas on how to play, and fill in that function (using your provided functions). Then they have a working program that they can change. You could also write a little less and teach them how to print out the board and get input and validate it (those can be walk-though lessons).
Checkers may be a bit complex, but that's the kind of idea I'm talking about. Something where it's conceptually simple and they can notice that they made a difference in a piece of software. It could be the logic on what to do in a poker hand, blackjack, which card to play in Uno, whatever.
Unless the kids are interested on their own, basic programming lessons (this is a loop, today we'll print the numbers 1 to 5) probably won't go over to well. You'll have to touch on that but giving them something they can get their feet wet in first would be my idea. Once that happens, if this continues you could walk them through writing EVERYTHING on their next (albeit simpler) program.
Bonus points if it is something where you can make their algorithms play against each-other. Go look at POTM and some of their contests. If you supplied everything but the decision logic then many of those would work well for the students, but specifically the game-like ones.
As for Python, I recommend it for a few reasons. It's free, it has an interactive command line, and I think it's "simple". By that I mean that there aren't a lot of superfluous words (Java can be kind of wordy). Python runs on any platform. It's syntax is clean, and the indenting makes it easy to follow (as well as teaching good habits).
I'd worry about the VB IDE being intimidating (as well as I'm not a VB fan). Java is nice but I think it's a little complex for a starting language for kids. BASIC is too antiquated, Python is almost as simple but much more powerful.
But I second the parent's post. HyperCard was perfect. It's a real shame it's gone. I wonder if I would have been interested in computers as much without it. I later tried BASIC (which of course got me nowhere). It took me years and years and years and years before I got to know enough that I could start writing things like I used to in Hypercard (due to the complexities of GUI programming).
I've got a Mac, I've had it for about 18 months now and I love it. I especially love the command prompt and all the Unix utilities. That said, I agree with the decision they made. Being able to tinker and repair the laptop, as well as write kernel changes and such, is a major boon. Children will be able to learn much more about the computer if they are interested. As much as I love my Mac, it doesn't compared to Linux in a few areas. There is much more information available through some of the interfaces on Linux (/dev and such, for example) than I can find on my Mac. There is quite a bit of documentation on writing drivers and kernel changes for Linux, but next to none for OS X save Apple's documentation (which I find to be a little sparse).
Don't forget that while OS X runs well on older Macs, a custom slimmed-down Linux will run much faster and use far fewer resources. OS X is just not designed to run on 128MB of RAM by any stretch, let alone less so applications still have room to run. Frankly I think Jobs knew that OS X was incompatible with what the OLPC people were planning (mostly hardware wise, but also in ideals).
I'm not surprised that RedHat is the distro chosen (especially considering that they are a sponsor), but I don't think that's why they didn't go with OS X.
Sounds like a good idea to me. While having a headphone jack would be very useful (listen to language lessons without disturbing others, including learning to read software), the microphone jack too (VOIP idea the article posits) is good, and the display upgrade is VERY good (especially on the 'net at large where most websites assume a minimum screen of 1024x768), I think the SD card is the killer feature.
Before this change, the storage on the machine was fixed. If you wanted to get more storage you would have to plug in an external USB drive (flash, hard drive, CD-RW, whatever). Now with SD cards you can expand the storage in unit, without having a USB key hang off the side of the machine. You can add up to 2 GB (4+ with newer standards) this way. While a 2 GB card is expensive now, it won't always be that way, and smaller cards (say 128 MB) are cheap (if I can get one at a drug store for $17, then people out to be able to get them pretty cheap, especially used). 128MB would be a 25% increase in the system's storage.
Even 64 MB will hold a TON of text, especially if you compress it.
I see this as a good thing. Let's not forget that the OLPC was to be sold at a loss (initially). So for all we know the new features increased the cost $100. They may not have increased costs at all and they just want to lose less so they can make more of 'em.
Hopefully, not only will this help people, some of the ideas will get used in mainstream laptops. If they can do that for $200-$250 (guessing on true cost), then they should be able to make me a nice 1600:900 (or so) LCD that I can view outside, inside, and won't kill a battery really fast. Considering how much power LCDs use (and how unviewable many are in direct sunlight) even a little improvement would go a long way.
And none of this counts the effecting giving tons of kids something as accessible and hackable as a C64 with the power to surf the 'net, be portable, and have an absolute ton of processing power. Considering what came out of C64 hackers (who had a vastly slower chip, vastly less memory, and no internet to get help from) I bet we will see some amazingly talented people as a result of this program.
I've been using it for a while now (a year and a half or so). The biggest thing I should warn you about is that if you are a early adopter, you may have a problem. What I mean is that when Tiger came out, it took a few months before they released a version that was compatible with iSync 2.0. Since Leopard is going to have iSync 3.0, I'm guessing something like that may happen again.
That said, I've had a Dell Axim X50v for two years now. The hardware is nice. The OS (Windows Mobile 2003) is not. They made some very odd choices (no real way to quit applications without a 3rd party tool or just "force quit"), Pocket IE is a total joke. Network configuration (if you have wireless) is terrible (they were supposed to fix that in the new version that I don't have). If you had to sync to Outlook I bet the device would be great. At this point, if my PDA died I think I'd buy the cheapest Palm with BlueTooth I could (looks like that would be an E2 if I went with a new device). I don't know if the newer version of Windows Mobile is any better, but I was very disappointed by the version I have. I used Windows CE 1.0 (HP 300LX represent!) and I felt like things had moved backwards. The calendar program is ugly. The mail program seems to be designed to work only by having Outlook on the desktop do the heavy lifting. The interface isn't nearly as nice as my old Newton was.
Also, installing applications tends to be a pain, ESPECIALLY from a Mac.
There is nothing wrong with Missing Sync, it's all complications of Microsoft's choices.
Where is a new Newton, Apple? We need you now more than ever.
Try 'em both. You may like using one more than another. You can look into other options (Sharp Zarus, an older iPaq with Linux, etc) too. Or you could just use a fancy cell phone that will let you sync such stuff to your computer.
I should mention that there is (or at least was, I don't follow it) another application to let one sync Windows Mobile devices to Macs. I don't remember the name but it shouldn't be hard to find.
I don't know, I think this is a good thing. If people want to kill themselves let them. There are already tons of people working on diet and anti-cholesterol drugs and such to "help" those people.
But what if you eat well and such? Something like this could be very important. You may think you are eating healthy, but what if you could take a test and find out that your diet needed more of X because that would reduce your risk of Y which is high because of genes A, B, and C?
Also, don't forget that it's easier to convince people to do something like eat healthy if you can point to a difinitive test and say "You have 3x the risk of heart disease even if you eat healthy, so imagine what your risk is the way you eat" than "Don't eat that it's bad for you."
Many people's diets and such are causing problems, but does that mean until we fix that we should ignore the other causes of those problems and the healthy eaters?
Well, there are a couple of things. First, they probably want to make sure it works well and can integrate correctly (being a default browser and such, they may have changed that API). But they also want to make sure it doesn't trigger any bugs. This may include avoiding known bugs, or finding new ones. What if FireFox was written correctly but happened to trigger some obscure bug that would cause your network connection to get dropped or stalled whenever you looked at a page over 100k or something like that.
It's important to find bugs that aren't triggerable yet. It's MORE important to find bugs that ARE triggerable.
Never. Too much NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome for that. I think one of the other posters is right. FireFox is getting popular and if it doesn't work with Vista (either intentionally or not) they will get tons of complaints ("Vista broke my InternetFox thing", "They are trying to crush FireFox", etc.). FireFox is so popular that they have to make sure it works. The only difference between it and some other program they'll do that for (Sims/Sim 2) is that FireFox is FOSS so we hear about it (where they have done this with Sims/Sims 2 and we don't hear a peep).
I've only been watching for two years or so. I've seen all the past episodes (thanks to Netflix and DVDs). I adored the 200th episode, I thought it was hilarious. I read this last night, and the blurb blamed the lack of Battlestar Galactica (as a lead in) and stiff compitition (Monk on USA, also fantastic). It's really too bad. They had just got a good new badguy (the Ori) too. Plus in the lead in retrospective thing before the 200th episode the actor who plays Daniel mentioned that he was supposed to have something happen to his character this season. Not dieing, not ascending, something inbetween.
Atlantis is good, but I'll miss SG1.
The problem is that they were not anonymised enough. They took out the user IDs, but they replaced them with numbers. As we've all seen, there was still enough there to identify people that way. To really sanitize it they would have had to remove that part so you couldn't tell which searches were together and which were from seperate users, but that would have made the data less usefull.
They would also have to remove all the searches that are to specific like "birth certificate for Joe B. McWhatever SSN:123-45-6789" and other such stuff which would have been a major burden too.
XBox 360 + Wii + games Good luck Sony, you're gonna need it.
Sorry, I forgot I can't use greater than or less than signs without escaping them. That should have read:
XBox 360 + Wii + games <= $600
Good luck Sony, you're gonna need it.
The XBox360 is being sold for much less money than it costs to make it so I don't see how you can complain about the price.
The PS3 will sell for $600, but some analysts have placed it's costs at $900-$1000 per unit. That means they are selling it at a $300-$400 discount.
That doesn't make $600 cost any less.
XBox 360 + Wii + games Good luck Sony, you're gonna need it.
Me thinks the relative shortages of ANY games didn't help, especially good games (of which there have been few).
It makes PERFECT sense to have them sitting in a warehouse. Remember the PS2? This is going to be worse. They need stock to sell. If they had any brains and had the ability, they would be cranking them out so they could sell them. Remember that when they got for $2000 on eBay, Sony only gets the origonal $500 or $600. They want more to sell, and making them now would allow that.
Despite all the (sometimes tremendous) screw ups around the PS3, I don't think they are THAT stupid. They aren't making them becuase they can't. The design isn't final, there are cell chip yield problems, they need more blu-ray drives, whatever. If they could make them, I think they would.
I know shortages get free press, but they will get enough of that anyway. If they can make an extra 1,000,000 units I don't think it would stop a shortage if that was distributed world wide. There would still be a shortage, but they would sell more.
Unless they are holding back because despite their predictions they don't think a $600 toy will sell well (especially compared to a 360 that seems very similar and is chaper, and the Wii which is innovative and MUCH cheaper).
Receiving stolen property, they are guilty. If they bought a nice laptop for $200 then they had to know it was stolen (especially since it probably had tons of business documents on it, if it's phoning home it hasn't been wiped). I doubt they bought it in good faith. If they DID (say they paid a decent amount that would buy them such a laptop) then they could get out of the charges by pointing out where they got it. I doubt the DA would press charges on them if they pointed out where they got it from and would testify to that fact.
If they bought it from a pawn shop or used computer shop or something, that shop is liable (I think) and they may still not have claim to the laptop. Both should have questioned the sale of this laptop with all the business stuff still on it (and even more.. selling it like that).
Still, crooks are, by and large, idiots. I would bet the original thief (or a direct relative/girlfriend/boyfriend) has the thing.
Either way, you would think the cops would be all over this one. Grand theft (the laptop cost over $1000 new, right?), known location (more or less, but it keeps phoning home), easy catch, and 100:1 odds that this is NOT the first/only crime the guy has committed (probably has a few other hot items near him).
I agree with one of the other comments. Go to the media. "His laptop was stolen, and he knew where it was... but the police wouldn't do a thing. Why your stuff isn't safe... tonight at 10." Or sue the department (that always gets things moving, just the threat with a nasty-gram should do). Or go talk to the DA. A case like this (likely a slam dunk) you would think they would want to take. They probably don't know about it and could get the police to go do something.
Yes, my comment was technically off topic, but it was modded up for a reason. I wrote it for a reason.
I like my DirecTiVo and I am really ticked off at them for ditching TiVo. My comment was written to remind people that DirecTV used to have TiVos which they abandoned sale of (they still support them, thankfully), that nothing is as good as a TiVo (not that I've seen yet, most have been laughably bad), and that DVR things for DirecTV users have gotten worse since you can't get a true TiVo (unless you are willing to pay through the nose for the HD TiVos that this new receiver is meant to replace).
It's not an answer, but it was a valid point that I felt fit there. DirecTV abandoned great units and replaced them with units that were perhaps adequate. Why did they do this? Almost certainly profit. You know what? I'd gladly pay 3x the DVR fee if I knew that I could get new TiVos from them that would continue to work (as opposed to mind which is basically on a death watch while they roll-out MPEG4).
Let's see if I can answer your points
Of course, I have a DirecTiVo... which they no longer sell. The fact they made them is why I don't think DirecTV will be sued. TiVo still gets a ton of money from DirecTiVo users.
I love my DirecTiVo. I think it's the best TiVo that was made at the time. Pure digital quality, tons of channels, Dolby Digital, record two shows at once, etc. It's a fantastic little machine. No home media and such, but that's OK, the dual tuners more than make up for that.
But you can't buy them any more from DirecTV. And DirecTV is moving towards MPEG4 which means my box is obsolete.
I plan to stay with my box as long as I can. When it no longer works, then I know exactly what I'll do. I enjoy DirecTV so if I can use one of the new Series 3 TiVos with DirecTV I will. If I can't do that and Dish starts offering true TiVos, I'll go there. Otherwise, I'll go to cable with a Series 3 TiVo.
I've had DirecTV for years and I loved the service. I didn't think anything would get me off it. Then they sold me a TiVo. They sold me the very device that changed my loyalty and will probably cause me to dump their service some time in the future.
I still think they seriously botched the whole TiVo deal. They should have advertised them. You should have been able to get a DirecTiVo for $50 on new accounts, or even better for free. Practically force 'em on the consumer. Consumers would have loved it. They would have struck a big blow against Dish. Their customers would be very loyal.
"Why pay $300 for a TiVo when you can get one from DirecTV for free that will record two things at once?"
They had their chance. They screwed up. Even if it was a 6 month promotion, they could have signed up enough people to make a ton of money off the monthly fees and have so many people tell their friends about it that it would encourage more sign ups later.
DirecTV: Not wanting me as a future customer for over 2 years
When I move to a new place, my guess is that I'll switch to cable and buy a series 3. The fact is the main reason I like DirecTV is because my local cable company has been terrible ever since Comcrud bought them. The local channels look better with an over the air antenna some times, and the cable channels look just as bad (if not like a VCR with bad tracking). If the area I move to has decent cable service, then my main reason for going with DirecTV will be gone. Combine that with my loss-of-TiVo and they will lose me as a customer.
I don't want a DVR, I want a TiVo.
Sorry about this long post, this is a touchy subject