but I it won't be a very modern style tablet. [...] most people scoffed at me when I have proposed these kinds of minimalist devices at the places I've worked.
People scoffed at netbooks too, circa 2007 ("Who wants a toy with 1Gb RAM, even if cheap?")
Problem is, scoffers / decision makers often have the latest-gadget-bias, i.e. the majority of them has the iPhone (n) when others are still quite happy with iPhone (n-2). Can I do my email? Can I surf the Web? Well, that's what me-average-joe is happy with.
It's like the IRS complaining because too many people don't pay due taxes.
I'm not sure about the legal framework, but either ICANN has no way to enforce the rules (then it should refer to a different authority), or if they has such power, then go ahead and ban the guilty ones from providing the service.
Interesting. Looks like Autogrill decided to licence as many brands as possible, and then "use" only the ones that make sense for them. They never used, for instance, the Sbarro or PizzaHut, and launched their own "Spizzico". With Burger King, though, they did just the opposite. I wonder how much they pay for a license that grants the right to keep it "sleeping".
I agree - but the key questiion is *where* infrastructure ends. Our idea of infrastructure is culturally and historically determined.
In some historical societies (even some well working ones, by most standards), food production was collectivized. In such societies, crop fields were by all means part of the infrastructure.
Conversely, in other societies, education (or water supply, for that matter) was privately owned.
Are hospitals part of the infrastructure or not? The Health Care debate of the last couple of decades in the US, ultimately revolves around this question. The Europeans has settled long ago that argument, by considering Hospitals as part of the infrastructure.
According to a widely quoted definition, infrastructure is made of ""the basic services or social capital of a country, or part of it, which make economic and social activities possible".
If we go by that, basically it is a tautology to say that infrastructure is just about everything that must be collectively owned. Again the key question is: what is part of infrastructure, and what is not.
Let's face it: OO is sadly nowhere close yet to MS-Office.
MS-Office is the most used client productivity suite in the world, and until we have a credible open source alternative, most people will still want to run Windows on their machine.
As long as a competitive, free market is ensured, this won't happen. If a ISP starts filtering, people will move to the next.
Of course, things may turn out very different if we allow dominant market positions to be built in the ISP market.
(But this won't happen, right? Just as we never let any dominant market position arise in the OS market, or in the microprocessor market. Now sorry, gotta rush back to my cave).
Yes, it does NOT search. But they sold it this way - or at least they played aggressively with the idea. While creating PR buzz around it, they introduced it like "not a Google killer", when nobody had any idea what the thing was (so they could introduce the concept just the way they wanted to, and they explicitely chose to introduce the Google benchmark, even if to negate it.) And they obviously KNEW where this approach would have led to, in people's mind.
In other words. If I launch a new ecommerce platform and I create a buzz around "not an alternative to eBay", I am then driving on purpose people towards a comparison with eBay.
On top, on interviews I read, they toyed with "talks" they were supposedly having with "major search engines" (one was in the NYT).
Where am I saying that they don't? What I am saying, is that you cannot customize the thing. You only can in Outlook 2007, because it's the only program not using the ribbon yet.
Keyboard combinations, once memorized, are the fastest way to access anything. (much faster than mouse clicking).
With the new interface, MS decided to sacrifice much of the customization options. There's simply not much that you can customize in the ribbon.
The office devteam found out that less than 3% of the users were customizing their menus and shortcuts in the previous versions, so they decided to drop it in the 2007.
Unfortunately for MS, that tiny 3% includes IT professionals, key decision makers in corporate deployment, etc: precisely the group that you really don't want to piss off.
Patent wars. The more patents you have, no matter how silly, the more you can credibly threat other organizations on a variety of legal and non-legal matters. Like, "Dear Megacompetitor, so you don't want to settle for XMIO on topic Y? Let's see... have you ever used any color in your emails? How about if we sue you for that?"
Yes, Hulu blocks IPs outside US. (Using a Well Known Search Engine, you'll find plenty of workarounds - pls try them only for Academic/Research purposes.)
The reason of the block, is not Hulu's inherent evil. It's rather the outdated structure of TV shows international rights.
If you sell The Simpsons in France, the French TV station which buys it, has an exclusive contract - i.e., nobody else can broadcast the Simpsons in France. Hulu may therefore risk legal trouble if they hulucast The Simpsons in France.
Needless to say, this is a big piece of BS: if you follow this logic, you'd make Satellite dishes illegal, because you can use them to watch The Simpsons anywhere in the world you are.
Such contracts/laws were made for a different world. Today, enforcing such rights on a territorial basis is close to ridiculous -and a sure encouragement for French users to torrent The Simpsons.
In 2050, this would not be a "computer story" anymore. Just like we don't consider it as a "camcording story" - while in 1930 it would have been, because video was a novelty.
(except that that it was not exactly camcording/video, but you get the idea)
Given the personal history of the powers that be in Russia, I find hard to believe that this guy is given the "unique opportunity" to access or publish "some of the KGB's most sensitive files".
Slashdot Mirror
but I it won't be a very modern style tablet. [...] most people scoffed at me when I have proposed these kinds of minimalist devices at the places I've worked.
People scoffed at netbooks too, circa 2007 ("Who wants a toy with 1Gb RAM, even if cheap?")
Problem is, scoffers / decision makers often have the latest-gadget-bias, i.e. the majority of them has the iPhone (n) when others are still quite happy with iPhone (n-2). Can I do my email? Can I surf the Web? Well, that's what me-average-joe is happy with.
This is something between scary and funny.
It's like the IRS complaining because too many people don't pay due taxes.
I'm not sure about the legal framework, but either ICANN has no way to enforce the rules (then it should refer to a different authority), or if they has such power, then go ahead and ban the guilty ones from providing the service.
Well you know you are getting old when you find yourself being prickly, on a saturday, about the syntax of a language dead 15 years ago..
I'll go rehearse some cobol now.
Is there a way to configure /. so that ALL first posts are automatically hidden?
If not, this is a feature request.
if you were using basic or basica, as i believe, your first program would have not come with a syntax error.
it would have printed a 0 [zero].
(now, if you moderated this comment as redundant, i would understand and agree. i just could not resist...)
I'm not on MS payroll, but honestly, is this article worth any attention?
I hope FF gets 99% of the market soon, but this type of baseless speculation certainly does not help.
Interesting.
Looks like Autogrill decided to licence as many brands as possible, and then "use" only the ones that make sense for them.
They never used, for instance, the Sbarro or PizzaHut, and launched their own "Spizzico". With Burger King, though, they did just the opposite.
I wonder how much they pay for a license that grants the right to keep it "sleeping".
There are no Starbucks in Italy and probably there will never be.
I heard similar arguments about McDonalds some 20 years ago. Now they are everywhere in Italy.
Which is precisely why Tesla is doing a good job in making these toys cool.
When I clicked on this article, I was 99.9% sure that the first comment would welcome ants overlords...
lol, why are mods moderating parent offtopic?? the poor guy was just being informative, nice, and not even controversial...
is it just me, or the moderation is getting more problematic lately, for whatever reason?
Can't we genetically engineer crop fields, to make the them white?
This is not entirely a joke, there's a similar idea in the original Gaia Hypothesis, even if only as a thought experiment.
I agree - but the key questiion is *where* infrastructure ends. Our idea of infrastructure is culturally and historically determined.
In some historical societies (even some well working ones, by most standards), food production was collectivized. In such societies, crop fields were by all means part of the infrastructure.
Conversely, in other societies, education (or water supply, for that matter) was privately owned.
Are hospitals part of the infrastructure or not? The Health Care debate of the last couple of decades in the US, ultimately revolves around this question. The Europeans has settled long ago that argument, by considering Hospitals as part of the infrastructure.
According to a widely quoted definition, infrastructure is made of ""the basic services or social capital of a country, or part of it, which make economic and social activities possible".
If we go by that, basically it is a tautology to say that infrastructure is just about everything that must be collectively owned. Again the key question is: what is part of infrastructure, and what is not.
The main reason is: MS-Office.
Let's face it: OO is sadly nowhere close yet to MS-Office.
MS-Office is the most used client productivity suite in the world, and until we have a credible open source alternative, most people will still want to run Windows on their machine.
Guys, I thought my irony was obvious by the reference to "free markets" like OS and microprocessors...
As long as a competitive, free market is ensured, this won't happen.
If a ISP starts filtering, people will move to the next.
Of course, things may turn out very different if we allow dominant market positions to be built in the ISP market.
(But this won't happen, right? Just as we never let any dominant market position arise in the OS market, or in the microprocessor market. Now sorry, gotta rush back to my cave).
Yes, it does NOT search. But they sold it this way - or at least they played aggressively with the idea.
While creating PR buzz around it, they introduced it like "not a Google killer", when nobody had any idea what the thing was (so they could introduce the concept just the way they wanted to, and they explicitely chose to introduce the Google benchmark, even if to negate it.) And they obviously KNEW where this approach would have led to, in people's mind.
In other words. If I launch a new ecommerce platform and I create a buzz around "not an alternative to eBay", I am then driving on purpose people towards a comparison with eBay.
On top, on interviews I read, they toyed with "talks" they were supposedly having with "major search engines" (one was in the NYT).
So they get what they were fishing for...
Where am I saying that they don't? What I am saying, is that you cannot customize the thing. You only can in Outlook 2007, because it's the only program not using the ribbon yet.
No, they implemented the ribbon because the wanted an interface to patent.
Read what they say, and how it pissed off even some MS developpers.
Keyboard combinations, once memorized, are the fastest way to access anything. (much faster than mouse clicking).
With the new interface, MS decided to sacrifice much of the customization options. There's simply not much that you can customize in the ribbon.
The office devteam found out that less than 3% of the users were customizing their menus and shortcuts in the previous versions, so they decided to drop it in the 2007.
Unfortunately for MS, that tiny 3% includes IT professionals, key decision makers in corporate deployment, etc: precisely the group that you really don't want to piss off.
Patent wars.
The more patents you have, no matter how silly, the more you can credibly threat other organizations on a variety of legal and non-legal matters.
Like, "Dear Megacompetitor, so you don't want to settle for XMIO on topic Y? Let's see... have you ever used any color in your emails? How about if we sue you for that?"
Uhm... does this mean that Usain Bolt is "not very fast", since you can probably run 100M in less than 1 minute?
Yes, Hulu blocks IPs outside US. (Using a Well Known Search Engine, you'll find plenty of workarounds - pls try them only for Academic/Research purposes.)
The reason of the block, is not Hulu's inherent evil. It's rather the outdated structure of TV shows international rights.
If you sell The Simpsons in France, the French TV station which buys it, has an exclusive contract - i.e., nobody else can broadcast the Simpsons in France. Hulu may therefore risk legal trouble if they hulucast The Simpsons in France.
Needless to say, this is a big piece of BS: if you follow this logic, you'd make Satellite dishes illegal, because you can use them to watch The Simpsons anywhere in the world you are.
Such contracts/laws were made for a different world. Today, enforcing such rights on a territorial basis is close to ridiculous -and a sure encouragement for French users to torrent The Simpsons.
In 2050, this would not be a "computer story" anymore. Just like we don't consider it as a "camcording story" - while in 1930 it would have been, because video was a novelty.
(except that that it was not exactly camcording/video, but you get the idea)
Given the personal history of the powers that be in Russia, I find hard to believe that this guy is given the "unique opportunity" to access or publish "some of the KGB's most sensitive files".