For $40 million it would have been better to give away cars worth that much. Gets them on the street for people to see, gets folks talking about GM giving away cars. I bet giving away cars would generate some buzz on facebook without all the extra work and cost.
Most marketing guys would take exception to this. Giving away your product is very dangerous, as free and worthless are concepts that the brain tends to lump together.
Or, you're tuned in, and don't even know it. Like subtle product placement in movies. You're being advertised to, and you don't even know it... The best advertising is advertising that makes you think that you developed a desire for the product independently, rather than being advertised to.
How is it that they can comprehend car models then? Selective stupidity? (More like selective ignorance that we should NOT cater to)
The Car Companies are well aware of this fact. Aside from some models which sell on more technical merits making them suitable to a particular niche (Heavy Duty Pickups, some sports cars, Wranglers), most car companies are moving more and more to a "Pick one of three trim levels, and a color." The days of mixing and matching your own special blend of options, power trains, etc are going away rapidly in the mainstream market.
Yes, but who has the power is sometimes surprising. For instance, me and 6.8 billion other people all choose not to buy a PlayBook. Take That RIM! I got the Power!
One of the reasons for this is percieved "Missed Opportunities". The idea that, yeah, maybe you picked Firefox, but you have a nagging feeling that you might have been happier with IceWeasel. This makes you enjoy FireFox less, through no fault of FireFox itself.
This is why all government funded survelence cameras need to have publicly available feeds. The world is moving towards ever more cameras, all the time. I don't think that tide will ever turn. This creates a system of those who are watched, and those who watch. The watched are inherently below the watchers. If we're going to move towards this sort of state, the way to return fairness to the citizenry is to give them the same power as the government to watch everything. It's a 21st century version of the Freedom Of Information Act...
In other news, another group of Chinese Scientists have announced that they have developed a method for filtering teleported qubits which contain information or ideas which are detrimental to the keeping of order of the society.
How many do we want / need to actually pass the test might be a good question. There is some point of diminishing returns on the effort invested. Some of the students are going to score badly, because standardized tests have been shown to disadvatage students who just don't give a shit.
What is the criteria for passing? How difficult are the questions? After all, our goal might be 100% of the students pass the test. But if we achieve that goal, the test is too easy. If it's pass / fail, somewhere between 40 and 60% pass rate is probably good, as it gives us a pointer to which students need remediation and which don't.
It would be nice, but no one's bitching that their phone isn't fast enough.
Speed isn't an issue, as phones are throttled by data rates that the carriers can support. Instead, things like actual security and real costs are the values.
But they bitch a bunch about battery life. Program efficiency may not be an issue to the touch and feel of the phone. But they are a huge issue in terms of battery life. The phone's processor spends most of its time in an idle/sleep mode. If it takes more cycles to achieve the same effect, then you're going to see a proportional hit on battery life. Every instruction executed has a cost measured in Coulombs.
An additional thought: This sort of transformation was the beginning of the end for Palm. (Although it's pretty clear the beginning of the end for RIM was years ago. What we're seeing now is the beginning of the end of the end of RIM.)
I think you're right. It appears that the tail is now wagging the dog. Six months ago, RIM was a handset maker that happened to be using QNX. It appears that they have now transformed into an OS maker that happens to be making Handsets. Almost as if QNX aquired RIM, not the other way around.
I think you're right. It's just OK. Watching the video on the disney research link, you can see the signal that they're measuring. It appears that they can detect the amount of touch (one finger, two fingers, your whole palm), but not much more subtle than that. If you ever messed around with a multi-meter as a kid on Resistance mode, you probably did much the same thing. The summary makes it seem like the system would be capable of distinguishing a lot of different features. Really, it appears (from the video) that it would probably be just as happy to see you put your fingers to your forehead as your lips (and that's assuming you have electrodes strapped to your ear and your wrist, based on the hand-touching demonstration.
In short, IMHO, this looks like a potential evolutionary change for some applications, but not the revolution the summary seems to promise. You're not going to be playing charades so you can use Siri without talking...
Makes me think of people I know with slow-moving cancers. We're all already 'dead'. People with illnesses just have a shorter, clearer timeframe. I've always been perplexed by the idea of medicines and other technologies that "save" lives. They prolong lives, but ultimately no lives are saved. You'll simply die of something else. In my case, chemotherapy prolonged my life, and for that I am grateful.
As a side note, such treatments also seem to have the wierd side effect of making you a bit philosophical in a detached kind of way (can you tell?). And iIt's not just me. A lot of other people I've met who've had similar experiences end up the same way.
Not at all. Parent post suggested a second option: Insurance. One option is to try to make sure nothing ever fails. The second option is to assume that things will fail, and have a recovery plan. This is a vaild suggestion.
Steganographically hide sensitive information in an innocuous looking video, and then hide it in your underpants thus guaranteeing it will arouse suspicion on discovery. How stupid are these guys??
Maybe they mis-translated another article on security, that said you should have as many "layers" as possible between you and your attacker.
Of course, that won't stop them. New terrorist strategy: Make everyone a terrorist by distributing encoded terrorist documents
I'm frankly surprised the child-porn sickos haven't been doing this for some time. Imagine a virus that installs a torrent client or other peer-to-peer style network on the computers it infests, then starts distributing porn from PC to PC. It would add a lot of plausible denyability to the fact that you had the stuff on your PC, if the virus was also there.
How flawed could the building have been? The blew up a bomb in the basement, and it kept standing. They flew a fully fueled 747 into each tower resulting in a couple of the biggest fires New York had seen in over a Century, and the damn things stayed up long enough for nearly everybody to get out. I'll hire that architect.
We should have built 2 ICBM silos there, put in the latest and greatest ICBMs with the highest yield warheads we have, and put up a bronze plaque stating, "The next time someone attacks us, we launch these missiles at everything they hold dear."
Yes, because that sort of thing tends to work so well against those who want to be martyrs in the first place...
We still remember. It adds to our determination. Nothing, including the war on terror is over until we say it is. Was it over when the Germans bombed Perl Harbor? Hell no!
Slashdot Mirror
For $40 million it would have been better to give away cars worth that much. Gets them on the street for people to see, gets folks talking about GM giving away cars. I bet giving away cars would generate some buzz on facebook without all the extra work and cost.
Most marketing guys would take exception to this. Giving away your product is very dangerous, as free and worthless are concepts that the brain tends to lump together.
Or, you're tuned in, and don't even know it. Like subtle product placement in movies. You're being advertised to, and you don't even know it... The best advertising is advertising that makes you think that you developed a desire for the product independently, rather than being advertised to.
How is it that they can comprehend car models then? Selective stupidity? (More like selective ignorance that we should NOT cater to)
The Car Companies are well aware of this fact. Aside from some models which sell on more technical merits making them suitable to a particular niche (Heavy Duty Pickups, some sports cars, Wranglers), most car companies are moving more and more to a "Pick one of three trim levels, and a color." The days of mixing and matching your own special blend of options, power trains, etc are going away rapidly in the mainstream market.
Yes, but who has the power is sometimes surprising. For instance, me and 6.8 billion other people all choose not to buy a PlayBook. Take That RIM! I got the Power!
According to Barry Schwartz (Let the spaceballs jokes begin...) it not only confuses people, it actually makes them less satisfied:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less
One of the reasons for this is percieved "Missed Opportunities". The idea that, yeah, maybe you picked Firefox, but you have a nagging feeling that you might have been happier with IceWeasel. This makes you enjoy FireFox less, through no fault of FireFox itself.
This is why all government funded survelence cameras need to have publicly available feeds. The world is moving towards ever more cameras, all the time. I don't think that tide will ever turn. This creates a system of those who are watched, and those who watch. The watched are inherently below the watchers. If we're going to move towards this sort of state, the way to return fairness to the citizenry is to give them the same power as the government to watch everything. It's a 21st century version of the Freedom Of Information Act...
In other news, another group of Chinese Scientists have announced that they have developed a method for filtering teleported qubits which contain information or ideas which are detrimental to the keeping of order of the society.
How many do we want / need to actually pass the test might be a good question. There is some point of diminishing returns on the effort invested. Some of the students are going to score badly, because standardized tests have been shown to disadvatage students who just don't give a shit.
What is the criteria for passing? How difficult are the questions? After all, our goal might be 100% of the students pass the test. But if we achieve that goal, the test is too easy. If it's pass / fail, somewhere between 40 and 60% pass rate is probably good, as it gives us a pointer to which students need remediation and which don't.
It would be nice, but no one's bitching that their phone isn't fast enough.
Speed isn't an issue, as phones are throttled by data rates that the carriers can support. Instead, things like actual security and real costs are the values.
But they bitch a bunch about battery life. Program efficiency may not be an issue to the touch and feel of the phone. But they are a huge issue in terms of battery life. The phone's processor spends most of its time in an idle/sleep mode. If it takes more cycles to achieve the same effect, then you're going to see a proportional hit on battery life. Every instruction executed has a cost measured in Coulombs.
An additional thought: This sort of transformation was the beginning of the end for Palm. (Although it's pretty clear the beginning of the end for RIM was years ago. What we're seeing now is the beginning of the end of the end of RIM.)
I think you're right. It appears that the tail is now wagging the dog. Six months ago, RIM was a handset maker that happened to be using QNX. It appears that they have now transformed into an OS maker that happens to be making Handsets. Almost as if QNX aquired RIM, not the other way around.
I think you're right. It's just OK. Watching the video on the disney research link, you can see the signal that they're measuring. It appears that they can detect the amount of touch (one finger, two fingers, your whole palm), but not much more subtle than that. If you ever messed around with a multi-meter as a kid on Resistance mode, you probably did much the same thing. The summary makes it seem like the system would be capable of distinguishing a lot of different features. Really, it appears (from the video) that it would probably be just as happy to see you put your fingers to your forehead as your lips (and that's assuming you have electrodes strapped to your ear and your wrist, based on the hand-touching demonstration.
In short, IMHO, this looks like a potential evolutionary change for some applications, but not the revolution the summary seems to promise. You're not going to be playing charades so you can use Siri without talking...
Makes me think of people I know with slow-moving cancers. We're all already 'dead'. People with illnesses just have a shorter, clearer timeframe. I've always been perplexed by the idea of medicines and other technologies that "save" lives. They prolong lives, but ultimately no lives are saved. You'll simply die of something else. In my case, chemotherapy prolonged my life, and for that I am grateful.
As a side note, such treatments also seem to have the wierd side effect of making you a bit philosophical in a detached kind of way (can you tell?). And iIt's not just me. A lot of other people I've met who've had similar experiences end up the same way.
Yup. Because one case where the do-nothing option isn't the best one means that it's always a bad option.
Not at all. Parent post suggested a second option: Insurance. One option is to try to make sure nothing ever fails. The second option is to assume that things will fail, and have a recovery plan. This is a vaild suggestion.
And SteganStanography is the art of hiding secret messages in court transcripts.
Um, yeah. Pretty sure the word "porn" is right there.
Steganographically hide sensitive information in an innocuous looking video, and then hide it in your underpants thus guaranteeing it will arouse suspicion on discovery. How stupid are these guys??
Maybe they mis-translated another article on security, that said you should have as many "layers" as possible between you and your attacker.
Of course, that won't stop them. New terrorist strategy: Make everyone a terrorist by distributing encoded terrorist documents
I'm frankly surprised the child-porn sickos haven't been doing this for some time. Imagine a virus that installs a torrent client or other peer-to-peer style network on the computers it infests, then starts distributing porn from PC to PC. It would add a lot of plausible denyability to the fact that you had the stuff on your PC, if the virus was also there.
Yes, because anecdotal evidence tends to be more true.
I've found that to be true in my personal experience.
Correction: 767s. Sorry about that.
For feeding the Trolls?
How flawed could the building have been? The blew up a bomb in the basement, and it kept standing. They flew a fully fueled 747 into each tower resulting in a couple of the biggest fires New York had seen in over a Century, and the damn things stayed up long enough for nearly everybody to get out. I'll hire that architect.
We should have built 2 ICBM silos there, put in the latest and greatest ICBMs with the highest yield warheads we have, and put up a bronze plaque stating, "The next time someone attacks us, we launch these missiles at everything they hold dear."
Yes, because that sort of thing tends to work so well against those who want to be martyrs in the first place...
We still remember. It adds to our determination. Nothing, including the war on terror is over until we say it is. Was it over when the Germans bombed Perl Harbor? Hell no!