Is for those supermarket and logistics people that get to buy $800-$1200 rugged versions of palm for their inventory and tracking applications. Somehow I think that 10 cheap palm devices last longer than one expensive tough one.
That's geographic ignorance. The continents are pretty well distinguished from each other, more than with others. Also, Central America is just part of another continent. It is not a continent by itself.
It's not ignorance, trust me, it's just a different way to distinguish world regions, the same way there are different measurement units. Fifty years ago in most schools (in my region), it was generally accepted that Eurasia was one big continent, but due to economic and political differences, it was "decided" to separate them into two different continents. The way it's taught here is fairly simple: a Continent is a large, self contained landmass seprated by oceans, but larger than an island, with the new twist that Europe and Asia are two separate continents. BTW, that's the dictionary definition (Real Academia de la Lengua Española). So now it's generally accepted in Latin America that the continents are America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceanía (which includes Australia but also includes New Zeland and other nearby islands).
The bottom line is, just becuase they teach you in the US that the continents are the ones you've heard, doesn't mean it's a universally accepted truth. It's not. It's the same with the point I was trying to make: It's generally considered ofensive from Mexico to Argentina that you guys consider yourselves the only Americans there are. Most Americans that live in the US don't know that, unfortunately. Wether you wanna hear it or not, it's the truth. Even if you don't agree. So you can either disregard it and sound like a jerk if you ever travel down here, or learn from it and keep it in mind. Or you can do the third option which is to mod me down and shut me up like someone did with my previous post...How un-american (the continent, not the country).
This is not going anywhere. Obviously people from the US and Canada don't have a problem calling people from the US the ONLY americans.
You're all completely disregarding the fact that this is not the case in other countries in the American Continent. Ask ANY Mexican, Argentinian, Peruvian, you name it. I don't expect you all to understand this, really. It might have to do with the fact that in english there's no way to make United States-men-and -women sound right, but in spanish you can always say Gringo, and yes, in Panama, for example, a Mexican can be called an american.
BTW, In Latin America (not sure if it's in all countries though), people are taught in school that America is a continent, North America, Central America and South America are parts of that continent. I just realized that that's different in the US and Canada, where North America (from Panama to Canada based on your dictionary) is considered a continent by itself.
Anyways, my point was that calling Canadian, or Mexican or whatever non-american is NOT right the same way you can't call the germans non-europeans. You obviously didn't like my argument. Too bad. You missed a chance to learn about other cultures.
I'm sorry, but I need to do this, and I'm not being sarcastic:
and Zed is how non-Americans say what we call "Zee"
America is a continent. The United States of America is a country that calls itself America becuase United-States-men-and-women just doesn't sound right. I understand all that, but when US people refer to non-US people they need to be considerate of the fact that calling, say, Canadians Non-American is just wrong.
Canada is also a country in America, as is the US and Mexico and Panama and Costa Rica. Vicente Fox is every bit as american as George Bush. If you travel outside the US, or talk to an international crowd, keep in mind that to most non-US americans, the fact that the US calls itself America is ofensive and seems extremely arrogant.
If you don't care about the opinion of an international crowd, then perhaps you're posting in the wrong website. Unless, of course, Taco declares Slashdot to be an all AMERICAN (as in US) website and all other "foreigners" are guests that need to conform. If that's the case, lemme know, becuase in that case, I am posting in the wrong website.
Like most people here in slashdot, I have the seemingly superhuman ability to understand how machines and devices (s/w and h/w) actually work by just looking at them. I'm sure this happens to a lot of people. It takes an incredibly complex or poorly designed user interface (and I'm not just talking computers here) to confuse people with this ability.
Now, I don't want to sound pedantic. I'm sure there's a whole lot of "gifts" other people have that I don't.
The problem for us is that it's pretty hard to relate to people that can't get their VCR's to stop blinking or adjust the brightness on their TV sets. Take my father for example. He once asked me what a computer program was (about two years ago). For a while there, I just looked at him, wondering if he was joking. How can someone _not_ know what a computer program is? then I thought and thought about it and realized that without our special ability, it MUST be pretty hard to figure these sort of thing out.
Enter the manuals. Manuals are supposed to take people from not understanding how something works, to understanding, at least in general terms, how the device/machine/programs work. Unfortunately, most manuals I've read don't do this. Instead, they take people from not knowing how something works to still not knowing how it works but at least being able to use it. I believe this is a Bad Thing.
See, we humans have the ability to understand a whole lot of things, but we've grown lazy as hell. We want to be able to drive a car without first understanding what internal combustion even means. We want to use VCR's and watch TV without first understanding what "video" is. And so on and so forth. Because of this, human knowledge is not growing at the same rate a human capacity, because most people just don't care. We want to have all the goodies, but not earn the right that knowledge gives us to use it. Instead we hack at them and struggle with them, and break them, and demand a growing tech support industry that helps us when soemthing doesn't work "as expected".
The funny thing is, we've become soooo good at creating products that shield the user from their internal workings that we've become accustomed to it. We demadn it this way. We even approve laws against actually telling people how it really works. And then we complain when our customers don't read the manuals.
I say, in a perfect world, all products should have basic documentation about usage and how the product actually works, and a lot of references to papers and materials that you can go to if you want to learn more. This is not what I get when I buy something nowadays. This is why I don't RTFM. And I'm pretty sure this is why a lot of people do love linux.
Look, I love a PS2 and love it. I bought it the day I saw the Xbox. I won't buy an Xbox anytime soon, as long as my favorite games are on the PS2.
Having said that, I disagree with the article. Simply put, XBox is technologically superior to the PS2 (and I'm talking game experience here, not specific specs), and although right now it's not a huge issue (although it is for some people), as time goes on, it'll be more and more important
Pretty soon people will look at PS2 games and then look at Xbox games and PC games and say "why can't my ps2 do that!", and THEN, only then, people will start considering an Xbox again.
If by that time the PS3 is not out yet, Microsoft will get enough momentum to either go ahead and release an Xbox3 or do with the Xbox what the PS2 is doing today, at a much lower cost (as the article says, the cost goes down according to Moore's law)
Basically MS will have a small window of oportunity (6-12 months?) in the next, say, 2 years, that they might or might not take advantage of, and that Sony might or might not prevent. Bottom line, it's not decided yet.
Re:The one thing you can say about China...
on
China Plans Moonbase
·
· Score: 1
I agree. I would add to this the fact that one thing the chinese have going for them is their political system. Now before you go and call me a Commie, think about it. The main reason the US stopped going to the moon was economics. It failed to make immediate economical sense, so when the political reasons vanished, so did motivation
The fact that the Chinese would do these things because its good for them (or because it'll make them more powerfull, give them a strategic advantage, or even an economic one in 50 years), and that they don't have to worry wether they can find the money to do it, or wether tax payers will agree, puts them in a very advantageous position to accomplish their goals.
Now, the good thing is, the US *might* feel threatened if the Chinese make enough progress and leaves the US behind (or catches up with them). This threat would force the US government to react.
Look, I'm not a US citizen (nor do I live there), but I'd rather see the US and capitalism go to the moon than the Chinese...
When you paste an image in Word, the default alignment layout for that image is "floating". Floating images completely destroy possible compatibility with anything else, including different installation of the same word document. I've seen two computers with the same version of Word, but with different printer drivers (which are used as part of the rendering process) that place those images in different locations. Also manipulating a floating image (as in moving it around) is completely erratic. So yes, it's a stupid lazy usage of Word to paste an image and not "fix" it's alignment layout.
Unfortunately, its hard to break the MS Word strangle hold not only because of the file format being so nasty to deal with
I disagree.
Always save your documents as RTF, which has all the features you need, and send them in that format to any MS Word user. Not a single one will complain, most won't even notice. All word processors translate RTF flawlessly.
Interoperability is a problem when THEY use Word and YOU have to read their docs, then, if they inserted an image inside a table using a floating picture allignment layout, or some other stupid lazy usagage of Word, you'll have a problem opening them since it'll probably be distorted.
I guess there's something for everyone. I have to disagree with some of your points:
- This is not a real MP3 Player by any means, and it's not marketed as one or a replacement for one. It just has the ability to play MP3's so that you can hear that one or two songs you really like when you're waiting for a meeting or between classes if you're a student. With the limited amount of memory available to PDA's, even with 128MB memory sticks, it just doesn't qualify as a real MP3 player. Just another feature, which I welcome.
- I have a sony clie 760 and it has around the same battery life. I use it for EVERYTHING since I bought a castaway keyboard and use it as my main note taking device at EVERY meeting. we're talking hours every day. I've never seen the battery under 50%. Let me remind you that the clié 760 has a 320X320 TFT color display, so I expect about the same battery usage.
- You can play MP3's without using the magic gate format (the proprietary crap they're using now) by simply loading the MP3's directly on the memory stick instead of using the dektop software that comes bundled. I do this regularly.
- A laptop is not the only option when you need a keyboard. Like I mentioned, I got a very portable, very practical collapsable keyboard for $100, plus the $450 that the clié cost, I spent a total of under $600 to have it shipped to central america (where I live) that fully replaces a laptop for everything, except for the ability to connect it to a projector for slideshow presentations, which I rarely do. I use spreadsheets at high resolutions, I type, take notes, write proposals at my favorite cafe, read ebooks and make little diagrams when necessary. It works perfectly and I saved at least $1,000.00 by not having to buy a laptop. It all comes with a nice leather case that carries both the pda and the keyboard. The new sony model is going to be even more practical than this.
I do agree with you that the memory stick is a very expensive format (about $1.20 per MB). It's very convenient since it's also used by a whole lot of other devices, but still, they have to be sony made, which sucks.
Look, I live in the Central American country of Panama. I was born here and have dedicated a lot of time to understanding why third world countries are what they are (for better or worse).
Where I live, people are generally quick to accept technology, and like everywhere else, it has become a symbol of status. The guy that _tries_ to wash your windshield in a streetlight has a pre-paid cellphone here. Hell, ALL cellphone accessories are sold AT streetlights here. There are entire towns where houses are put together, rather than built, using materials and methods I still cannot comprehend, boldly defying conventional wisdom and the laws of physics, and yet they all have 2-3 25"+ TV sets, Big Stereo equipment, VHS, one generation old video game systems and more. Some even have satellite TV. We're talking about people that make $200-$500/month. And that's household income.
And yet I'm of the opinion that putting a computer in every home would not solve the problem of the so called digital divide, in fact, I think it would make it worse. Here's my rationale:
If a computer was given for free to every person in my country that can't (or won't) afford one, more than 95% of the people would break it, put it away, sell it (if market price doesn't go down too much), and in general, not value them for what they're worth (economically and intelectually). There are a lot of legitimate cases where people really need one and can't afford it, but even those would probably not value them as much as if they had worked and saved money for their own.
Sure, some 5% of the people would change their lives by having access to a computer, learning how to use it, hooking up to the Intenret an having access to all the information that's available (the good AND the bad which forces you to develop critical thinking). After all, this is similar to what happened to me when my parents won $10,000 in the lottery and bought me a $2,000 PC 10 years ago (now I have a consulting firm and i'm doing pretty well, thank you).
The problem is, you would still have a mayority that not only can't but won't use a computer, and a minority that does. Digital Divide anyone? Only this time it's not economically based, but intelectually based.
It's all a cultural problem. Most people don't use computers because they don't know how good it would be for them, for their carriers, for developing critical thinking, for improving their competitivenes (professionally), for having access to much more information, for improving productivity, etc.
This is not very different from someone giving you a supersonic jet for free, and telling you it's much better than your Honda Civic. There isn't much I can do with a supersonic jet to be honest, I see no reason to learn to fly if I can get around with my Jetta pretty well. Besides, they say learning to fly is very very hard, so why waste my time? Well, maybe I could sell that Jet to someone that does fly!
I believe the only way to actually close the Digital Divide (God, I hate clichés) is to improve the cultural level of developing populations, promote critical thinking, make people understand that they have to "work for it", and that in the end it's worth it (what capitalism is based on), and THEN let them BUY computers real cheap. Never give them away.
There's this little anectdote I want to share before I wrap this up. About 30 years ago there was this military dictator in Panama. A guy called Torrijos. Most people agree he was a pretty cool guy. You've probably heard that name if you're older than 20 and know a bit of history. Anyways, he used to give food and money away to people in a provice called Colon, the second largest city here. After a very short while, they got used to getting everything for free, and just adored the guy. Torrijos died in 1981 (they say it was Noriega, but who knows...)
Three years ago we were going to build an earth station in Colon, wire the area with fiber optics, provide local ISP service, etc. I interviewed over 40 Colon residents for different low level possitions. Nobody would work after 5PM (even when you pay the extra hours). The few we actually hired, would never, ever show up on time for work, and when they did you could still smell the alcohol. We decided to close the shop very quickly. Last week, MONADESCO (Colon Unemployed Movement) was barricading the streets of Colon. They want Jobs (as long as they don't have to work). They want food. They want money. You wanna give these guys free computers? right.
What in the world are you talking about? did you read the entire article? page 9 of the article states: Synchronization
The Zaurus includes Qtopia Desktop for desktop synchronization. The sync process is very similar to a Palm HotSync, and in fact, Qtopia Desktop is eerily similar to Palm Desktop. If you prefer, the Zaurus also includes a copy of IntelliSync Lite, which allows you to synchronize Qtopia Desktop with either Palm Desktop or Microsoft Outlook.
If you use a GNU/Linux desktop instead of a Windows system, a version of Qtopia Desktop for GNU/Linux is also available, provided you have a USB-capable distribution. Sharp intends to have Mac OS X synchronization working soon, but it is not yet available.
I know I'm posting late, but I hope someone reads this and comments.
I've had this recurring thought in my head regarding compression that I haven't been able to prove/disprove.
Disclaimer: I know absolutely nothing about compression other than what commons sense tells me.
Now for my theory: Is it possible to make an analysis of a whole lot of data from a whole lot of sources for certain period of time. Let's say I log every single bit of data that comes and goes from, say, AOL's network. I then run an analysis of the data and come up with, say, the 5 million most used 8-byte strings. You probably want to play with the string sizes and number of strings to see what makes mathematical sense. You then keep a copy of the 40MB indexed string dbase on every internet node, or at each end of a slow link, or whatever, and then run all incoming and outgoing data through a program that trnaslates index references with actual data.
Would that work? since a 5 million entry index requires a 3 byte key to acces an 8 byte string, would I get a 3/8 lossless compression on top of whatever's in place right now, whenever I hit an indexed string?
serve as a portable game player in conjunction with Microsoft's Xbox video game console.
to:
Nintendo will have a competition in the handheld market soon.
Even when you read the article, it is pretty clear that this device is more a tablet PC than a portable gaming system. Comparing the media pad to the GBA is like comparing my desktop PC to my PS2, it just doesn't make sense. And they don't compete with each other either.
The media pad will have to be coupled with the Xbox in order to function as a gaming system, and even that won't be its intended target. They plan to use it to provide some PDA functions and add functionality to interactive TV apps and other weird things.
It's not like they designed eyeballs from scratch. They took undiferentiated cells, which already had the information on how to become regular eyeballs, and then made them grow in that direction. Going from this to actually changing the ways those eyes work would be like engineering eyeballs from scratch. We're not even close to having the information or technology required to get there. Sure we know how eyes work, but changing genes to make them produce different results is NOT where we are right now.
Besides, if we had the ability to do this, I wouldn't consider it a misuse, although I can see why a lot of people would. Besides, all of the applications you mention are already available, cheap and common through different gadgets
I've never ever fired a shot in a games war, or a console war, but you comments really pulled my strings.
This really all is just nitt-picking though because the fact of the matter is that PS2 is crap
If this isn't flamebait, I don't know what is. EVERYBODY knows, including you, that a console is as good as its games. And even if it wasn't, you can't say the PS2 is crap without providing your arguments and backing up your claims with hard evidence.
I waited and waited and waited to buy a next generation console, mainly because I wanted to make the right decision. Then the xbox and GC came out. I played most available games on both systems for at least an hour each, then I went out and got me a PS2. Why? It's the games stupid!
Basically your comments tell me that either you're 12 and don't quite remember the very many instances in the past where the console with the best specs was not the one everybody wanted, thus nobody wrote good games for it, or you're a complete troll and just want to make people react to your comments.
My personal experience, and a very subjective one I might add, is that technically the best consoles are the xbox, the GC and the PS2 in that order, but as far as games, the best console is the PS2, then the Xbox and then the GC.
Here are some facts for you: The Xbox and the GC both have slightly better graphics than the PS2. the PS2 has more good games than the Xbox and GC combined. And the lineup for the first half of next year, at least, doesn't seem to reverse the course
Well, if you ask me, that's exactly the person needed for the job. Virtually no engineer, or space buff for that matter, that is given 12K employees and tons of cash to play with, will make decisions that would turn NASA into a space promotion and facilitation agency. You need a bean counter to figure out that it just doesn't make sense to spend ALL that money in not-for-profit ventures. Sure, NASA is supposed to be scientifically profitable right now (with lots of arguments going against that statement in the last 10 years), but by now everyone realizes that it is the private sector that can run self sustained, profitable activities, where scientific achievement is usually followed by economic achievemnt.
Warning: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (111) in/home/sites/site53/users/systool/stbwebsite/inc/da tabase.inc on line 17
Secret code error number 83: localhost, bfadmin.
Could the biggest problem with Linux usability be that most of the people teaching newbies to use Linux are too smart and know too much?"
I disagree. See there are three types of people that use computers. Those that thoroughly understand them. Those that use them for a little while and then "get it". And those that need to be taught.
I think the secret for a piece of software's popularity is to capture the second group. If linux was really as easy as it needs to be, it wouldn't need to be taught. Just like most people don't need someone to teach them how to use windows and most of its apps. It's the second group that make most users and eventually they drag along the third group.
Re:What is important in technology?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 2
I guess we agree to disagree then. The whole point of my post was that the technology unveiled today with SegwayHT is good enough and cheap enough to make the seemingly sci fi applications I suggest practical. I don't think that something that looks sci fi, or gee-wiz technology like you call it, is by any means unimportant just because of that fact.
My perception is that we disagree on how we might use the new technology, instead of it being possible or not (or feasible or not)
I'm of the opinion that enhancing human ability is far more productive than self contained technology that matches it or surpasses it. Of course this is a dilema that has been address by engineering and science long before we realized it existed, so we seem to have a valid argument here.
But then again, isn't a froklift a way to enhance human ability? isn't a tank? What's the difference between, say, a tank and a mech armor? form factor? humanoid form? likeness to Japanimation models? I personally think the guys that invented this stuff, from MazingerZ on (or whatever was the first vision of a mech armor) had a point and a good idea. Same point and idea I attribute to Clarke's geosynchronic satellites (wether he invented it or not), or Verne's submarine. In the end, it's gonna be good ol' fashion Supply and Demand that determines what becomes fact and what fiction.
BTW, please excuse my english. It's not my native language, although I'm working on it. And no, I'm not a US Citizen, but I am an American. I just live in a different country in the same continent as you do. And no, this doesn't affect my knowledge of the DoD, with whom I've worked with many times in the past as a contractor for telecomm services.
Re:What is important in technology?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
If you re-read my post, or even the part you quoted, I don't think they'll pick up this product, I think they might pick up the technology and further develop it into a different product. This they have done tons of times.
Re:What is important in technology?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 2
The idea is for it NOT to be more expensive than a Tank and a Mech armor wouldnt necessarily compete or replace one either.
Take today's conflict for example. You have marines in the ground in Kandahar. These are a small number of units that should produce high returns. If you can enhance their strength and protection at the same time, without restricting their ability to operate independantly (unlinke tanks that you can't fit inside an undeground cave), you gain something valuable. Furthermore, with enhanced strength you have the ability to carry a whole lot more firepower than a regular joe. In fact if this wasn't a desired technology, why is DARPA and several other DoD agencies spending tons of your tax dollars in researching this? I bet my email account that Kamen is gonna get a call from the DoD within the next month.
Besides, military is not the only useful application for Mech Armors. Think factories. Right now you need one of those expensive lifters (or whatever you call them) that lift heavy boxes, but can only operate in very standard environments (right box sizes, righ shelf sizes, right distance between shelves, etc.). If the cost of one of these armors is at least equal to those lifters, you have a winner since you save money elsewhere (Think the armor from the end of Alien 2).
Also, there're several applications for emergency situations, a la WTC, where these type of armor would have, perhaps, saved lives of those wearing them and of those beneath the rubble, since enhanced strength might have allowed for faster removal of large debris (of course, I can't be sure since i've never been to ground zero, but I can think of other disaster areas I've been to where this would have helped.
Again you're just showing a lack of vision similar to other posts that don't see value for some technology for them or their immedate surroundings, and automatically assume it's not valuable for anybody else.
Re:What is important in technology?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 2
I can't agree more. I know that by know this post will probably be read by about 3 people, but I need to say this anyways.
This IS a breakthrough and I can't believe it's not obvious to anyone. Think about how close this is to making a full blown mech armor. Nope, I'm not kidding. If you can have gyros and electronics that sample your movements at 100Hz, and motors that react accordingly, enhancing human strength via this technology should just be a matter of doing more of the same. This thing is 65lbs yet it moves effortlesstly on very little power. If anyone has seen Kamen's iBot, and the way it reacts to someone trying to knock you off it when in two wheel mode, you know what i'm talking about. It's that precise, and now it's widely available. This specific application might not be revolutionary but evolutionary, but the technology behind it is definetely a huge breakthrough.
Slashdot Mirror
Is for those supermarket and logistics people that get to buy $800-$1200 rugged versions of palm for their inventory and tracking applications. Somehow I think that 10 cheap palm devices last longer than one expensive tough one.
That's geographic ignorance. The continents are pretty well distinguished from each other, more than with others. Also, Central America is just part of another continent. It is not a continent by itself.
It's not ignorance, trust me, it's just a different way to distinguish world regions, the same way there are different measurement units. Fifty years ago in most schools (in my region), it was generally accepted that Eurasia was one big continent, but due to economic and political differences, it was "decided" to separate them into two different continents. The way it's taught here is fairly simple: a Continent is a large, self contained landmass seprated by oceans, but larger than an island, with the new twist that Europe and Asia are two separate continents. BTW, that's the dictionary definition (Real Academia de la Lengua Española). So now it's generally accepted in Latin America that the continents are America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceanía (which includes Australia but also includes New Zeland and other nearby islands).
The bottom line is, just becuase they teach you in the US that the continents are the ones you've heard, doesn't mean it's a universally accepted truth. It's not. It's the same with the point I was trying to make: It's generally considered ofensive from Mexico to Argentina that you guys consider yourselves the only Americans there are. Most Americans that live in the US don't know that, unfortunately. Wether you wanna hear it or not, it's the truth. Even if you don't agree. So you can either disregard it and sound like a jerk if you ever travel down here, or learn from it and keep it in mind. Or you can do the third option which is to mod me down and shut me up like someone did with my previous post...How un-american (the continent, not the country).
This is not going anywhere. Obviously people from the US and Canada don't have a problem calling people from the US the ONLY americans.
You're all completely disregarding the fact that this is not the case in other countries in the American Continent. Ask ANY Mexican, Argentinian, Peruvian, you name it. I don't expect you all to understand this, really. It might have to do with the fact that in english there's no way to make United States-men-and -women sound right, but in spanish you can always say Gringo, and yes, in Panama, for example, a Mexican can be called an american.
BTW, In Latin America (not sure if it's in all countries though), people are taught in school that America is a continent, North America, Central America and South America are parts of that continent. I just realized that that's different in the US and Canada, where North America (from Panama to Canada based on your dictionary) is considered a continent by itself.
Anyways, my point was that calling Canadian, or Mexican or whatever non-american is NOT right the same way you can't call the germans non-europeans. You obviously didn't like my argument. Too bad. You missed a chance to learn about other cultures.
I'm sorry, but I need to do this, and I'm not being sarcastic:
and Zed is how non-Americans say what we call "Zee"
America is a continent. The United States of America is a country that calls itself America becuase United-States-men-and-women just doesn't sound right. I understand all that, but when US people refer to non-US people they need to be considerate of the fact that calling, say, Canadians Non-American is just wrong.
Canada is also a country in America, as is the US and Mexico and Panama and Costa Rica. Vicente Fox is every bit as american as George Bush. If you travel outside the US, or talk to an international crowd, keep in mind that to most non-US americans, the fact that the US calls itself America is ofensive and seems extremely arrogant.
If you don't care about the opinion of an international crowd, then perhaps you're posting in the wrong website. Unless, of course, Taco declares Slashdot to be an all AMERICAN (as in US) website and all other "foreigners" are guests that need to conform. If that's the case, lemme know, becuase in that case, I am posting in the wrong website.
Like most people here in slashdot, I have the seemingly superhuman ability to understand how machines and devices (s/w and h/w) actually work by just looking at them. I'm sure this happens to a lot of people. It takes an incredibly complex or poorly designed user interface (and I'm not just talking computers here) to confuse people with this ability.
Now, I don't want to sound pedantic. I'm sure there's a whole lot of "gifts" other people have that I don't.
The problem for us is that it's pretty hard to relate to people that can't get their VCR's to stop blinking or adjust the brightness on their TV sets. Take my father for example. He once asked me what a computer program was (about two years ago). For a while there, I just looked at him, wondering if he was joking. How can someone _not_ know what a computer program is? then I thought and thought about it and realized that without our special ability, it MUST be pretty hard to figure these sort of thing out.
Enter the manuals. Manuals are supposed to take people from not understanding how something works, to understanding, at least in general terms, how the device/machine/programs work. Unfortunately, most manuals I've read don't do this. Instead, they take people from not knowing how something works to still not knowing how it works but at least being able to use it. I believe this is a Bad Thing.
See, we humans have the ability to understand a whole lot of things, but we've grown lazy as hell. We want to be able to drive a car without first understanding what internal combustion even means. We want to use VCR's and watch TV without first understanding what "video" is. And so on and so forth. Because of this, human knowledge is not growing at the same rate a human capacity, because most people just don't care. We want to have all the goodies, but not earn the right that knowledge gives us to use it. Instead we hack at them and struggle with them, and break them, and demand a growing tech support industry that helps us when soemthing doesn't work "as expected".
The funny thing is, we've become soooo good at creating products that shield the user from their internal workings that we've become accustomed to it. We demadn it this way. We even approve laws against actually telling people how it really works. And then we complain when our customers don't read the manuals.
I say, in a perfect world, all products should have basic documentation about usage and how the product actually works, and a lot of references to papers and materials that you can go to if you want to learn more. This is not what I get when I buy something nowadays. This is why I don't RTFM. And I'm pretty sure this is why a lot of people do love linux.
Look, I love a PS2 and love it. I bought it the day I saw the Xbox. I won't buy an Xbox anytime soon, as long as my favorite games are on the PS2.
Having said that, I disagree with the article. Simply put, XBox is technologically superior to the PS2 (and I'm talking game experience here, not specific specs), and although right now it's not a huge issue (although it is for some people), as time goes on, it'll be more and more important
Pretty soon people will look at PS2 games and then look at Xbox games and PC games and say "why can't my ps2 do that!", and THEN, only then, people will start considering an Xbox again.
If by that time the PS3 is not out yet, Microsoft will get enough momentum to either go ahead and release an Xbox3 or do with the Xbox what the PS2 is doing today, at a much lower cost (as the article says, the cost goes down according to Moore's law)
Basically MS will have a small window of oportunity (6-12 months?) in the next, say, 2 years, that they might or might not take advantage of, and that Sony might or might not prevent. Bottom line, it's not decided yet.
I agree. I would add to this the fact that one thing the chinese have going for them is their political system. Now before you go and call me a Commie, think about it. The main reason the US stopped going to the moon was economics. It failed to make immediate economical sense, so when the political reasons vanished, so did motivation
The fact that the Chinese would do these things because its good for them (or because it'll make them more powerfull, give them a strategic advantage, or even an economic one in 50 years), and that they don't have to worry wether they can find the money to do it, or wether tax payers will agree, puts them in a very advantageous position to accomplish their goals.
Now, the good thing is, the US *might* feel threatened if the Chinese make enough progress and leaves the US behind (or catches up with them). This threat would force the US government to react.
Look, I'm not a US citizen (nor do I live there), but I'd rather see the US and capitalism go to the moon than the Chinese...
When you paste an image in Word, the default alignment layout for that image is "floating". Floating images completely destroy possible compatibility with anything else, including different installation of the same word document. I've seen two computers with the same version of Word, but with different printer drivers (which are used as part of the rendering process) that place those images in different locations. Also manipulating a floating image (as in moving it around) is completely erratic. So yes, it's a stupid lazy usage of Word to paste an image and not "fix" it's alignment layout.
Unfortunately, its hard to break the MS Word strangle hold not only because of the file format being so nasty to deal with
I disagree.
Always save your documents as RTF, which has all the features you need, and send them in that format to any MS Word user. Not a single one will complain, most won't even notice. All word processors translate RTF flawlessly.
Interoperability is a problem when THEY use Word and YOU have to read their docs, then, if they inserted an image inside a table using a floating picture allignment layout, or some other stupid lazy usagage of Word, you'll have a problem opening them since it'll probably be distorted.
It's nice to see Apple having the collective cajones to ante up and reply
IT's Cojones god damn it, COJONES, not Cajones. Cojones is the spanish word for testicles, while cajones means "bix boxes".
I guess there's something for everyone. I have to disagree with some of your points:
- This is not a real MP3 Player by any means, and it's not marketed as one or a replacement for one. It just has the ability to play MP3's so that you can hear that one or two songs you really like when you're waiting for a meeting or between classes if you're a student. With the limited amount of memory available to PDA's, even with 128MB memory sticks, it just doesn't qualify as a real MP3 player. Just another feature, which I welcome.
- I have a sony clie 760 and it has around the same battery life. I use it for EVERYTHING since I bought a castaway keyboard and use it as my main note taking device at EVERY meeting. we're talking hours every day. I've never seen the battery under 50%. Let me remind you that the clié 760 has a 320X320 TFT color display, so I expect about the same battery usage.
- You can play MP3's without using the magic gate format (the proprietary crap they're using now) by simply loading the MP3's directly on the memory stick instead of using the dektop software that comes bundled. I do this regularly.
- A laptop is not the only option when you need a keyboard. Like I mentioned, I got a very portable, very practical collapsable keyboard for $100, plus the $450 that the clié cost, I spent a total of under $600 to have it shipped to central america (where I live) that fully replaces a laptop for everything, except for the ability to connect it to a projector for slideshow presentations, which I rarely do. I use spreadsheets at high resolutions, I type, take notes, write proposals at my favorite cafe, read ebooks and make little diagrams when necessary. It works perfectly and I saved at least $1,000.00 by not having to buy a laptop. It all comes with a nice leather case that carries both the pda and the keyboard. The new sony model is going to be even more practical than this.
I do agree with you that the memory stick is a very expensive format (about $1.20 per MB). It's very convenient since it's also used by a whole lot of other devices, but still, they have to be sony made, which sucks.
Look, I live in the Central American country of Panama. I was born here and have dedicated a lot of time to understanding why third world countries are what they are (for better or worse).
Where I live, people are generally quick to accept technology, and like everywhere else, it has become a symbol of status. The guy that _tries_ to wash your windshield in a streetlight has a pre-paid cellphone here. Hell, ALL cellphone accessories are sold AT streetlights here. There are entire towns where houses are put together, rather than built, using materials and methods I still cannot comprehend, boldly defying conventional wisdom and the laws of physics, and yet they all have 2-3 25"+ TV sets, Big Stereo equipment, VHS, one generation old video game systems and more. Some even have satellite TV. We're talking about people that make $200-$500/month. And that's household income.
And yet I'm of the opinion that putting a computer in every home would not solve the problem of the so called digital divide, in fact, I think it would make it worse. Here's my rationale:
If a computer was given for free to every person in my country that can't (or won't) afford one, more than 95% of the people would break it, put it away, sell it (if market price doesn't go down too much), and in general, not value them for what they're worth (economically and intelectually). There are a lot of legitimate cases where people really need one and can't afford it, but even those would probably not value them as much as if they had worked and saved money for their own.
Sure, some 5% of the people would change their lives by having access to a computer, learning how to use it, hooking up to the Intenret an having access to all the information that's available (the good AND the bad which forces you to develop critical thinking). After all, this is similar to what happened to me when my parents won $10,000 in the lottery and bought me a $2,000 PC 10 years ago (now I have a consulting firm and i'm doing pretty well, thank you).
The problem is, you would still have a mayority that not only can't but won't use a computer, and a minority that does. Digital Divide anyone? Only this time it's not economically based, but intelectually based.
It's all a cultural problem. Most people don't use computers because they don't know how good it would be for them, for their carriers, for developing critical thinking, for improving their competitivenes (professionally), for having access to much more information, for improving productivity, etc.
This is not very different from someone giving you a supersonic jet for free, and telling you it's much better than your Honda Civic. There isn't much I can do with a supersonic jet to be honest, I see no reason to learn to fly if I can get around with my Jetta pretty well. Besides, they say learning to fly is very very hard, so why waste my time? Well, maybe I could sell that Jet to someone that does fly!
I believe the only way to actually close the Digital Divide (God, I hate clichés) is to improve the cultural level of developing populations, promote critical thinking, make people understand that they have to "work for it", and that in the end it's worth it (what capitalism is based on), and THEN let them BUY computers real cheap. Never give them away.
There's this little anectdote I want to share before I wrap this up. About 30 years ago there was this military dictator in Panama. A guy called Torrijos. Most people agree he was a pretty cool guy. You've probably heard that name if you're older than 20 and know a bit of history. Anyways, he used to give food and money away to people in a provice called Colon, the second largest city here. After a very short while, they got used to getting everything for free, and just adored the guy. Torrijos died in 1981 (they say it was Noriega, but who knows...)
Three years ago we were going to build an earth station in Colon, wire the area with fiber optics, provide local ISP service, etc. I interviewed over 40 Colon residents for different low level possitions. Nobody would work after 5PM (even when you pay the extra hours). The few we actually hired, would never, ever show up on time for work, and when they did you could still smell the alcohol. We decided to close the shop very quickly. Last week, MONADESCO (Colon Unemployed Movement) was barricading the streets of Colon. They want Jobs (as long as they don't have to work). They want food. They want money. You wanna give these guys free computers? right.
What in the world are you talking about? did you read the entire article? page 9 of the article states:
Synchronization
The Zaurus includes Qtopia Desktop for desktop synchronization. The sync process is very similar to a Palm HotSync, and in fact, Qtopia Desktop is eerily similar to Palm Desktop. If you prefer, the Zaurus also includes a copy of IntelliSync Lite, which allows you to synchronize Qtopia Desktop with either Palm Desktop or Microsoft Outlook.
If you use a GNU/Linux desktop instead of a Windows system, a version of Qtopia Desktop for GNU/Linux is also available, provided you have a USB-capable distribution. Sharp intends to have Mac OS X synchronization working soon, but it is not yet available.
I know I'm posting late, but I hope someone reads this and comments.
I've had this recurring thought in my head regarding compression that I haven't been able to prove/disprove.
Disclaimer: I know absolutely nothing about compression other than what commons sense tells me.
Now for my theory: Is it possible to make an analysis of a whole lot of data from a whole lot of sources for certain period of time. Let's say I log every single bit of data that comes and goes from, say, AOL's network. I then run an analysis of the data and come up with, say, the 5 million most used 8-byte strings. You probably want to play with the string sizes and number of strings to see what makes mathematical sense. You then keep a copy of the 40MB indexed string dbase on every internet node, or at each end of a slow link, or whatever, and then run all incoming and outgoing data through a program that trnaslates index references with actual data.
Would that work? since a 5 million entry index requires a 3 byte key to acces an 8 byte string, would I get a 3/8 lossless compression on top of whatever's in place right now, whenever I hit an indexed string?
How do you go from:
serve as a portable game player in conjunction with Microsoft's Xbox video game console.
to:
Nintendo will have a competition in the handheld market soon.
Even when you read the article, it is pretty clear that this device is more a tablet PC than a portable gaming system. Comparing the media pad to the GBA is like comparing my desktop PC to my PS2, it just doesn't make sense. And they don't compete with each other either.
The media pad will have to be coupled with the Xbox in order to function as a gaming system, and even that won't be its intended target. They plan to use it to provide some PDA functions and add functionality to interactive TV apps and other weird things.
I think you misunderstand this technology
It's not like they designed eyeballs from scratch. They took undiferentiated cells, which already had the information on how to become regular eyeballs, and then made them grow in that direction. Going from this to actually changing the ways those eyes work would be like engineering eyeballs from scratch. We're not even close to having the information or technology required to get there. Sure we know how eyes work, but changing genes to make them produce different results is NOT where we are right now.
Besides, if we had the ability to do this, I wouldn't consider it a misuse, although I can see why a lot of people would. Besides, all of the applications you mention are already available, cheap and common through different gadgets
I've never ever fired a shot in a games war, or a console war, but you comments really pulled my strings.
This really all is just nitt-picking though because the fact of the matter is that PS2 is crap
If this isn't flamebait, I don't know what is. EVERYBODY knows, including you, that a console is as good as its games. And even if it wasn't, you can't say the PS2 is crap without providing your arguments and backing up your claims with hard evidence.
I waited and waited and waited to buy a next generation console, mainly because I wanted to make the right decision. Then the xbox and GC came out. I played most available games on both systems for at least an hour each, then I went out and got me a PS2. Why? It's the games stupid!
Basically your comments tell me that either you're 12 and don't quite remember the very many instances in the past where the console with the best specs was not the one everybody wanted, thus nobody wrote good games for it, or you're a complete troll and just want to make people react to your comments.
My personal experience, and a very subjective one I might add, is that technically the best consoles are the xbox, the GC and the PS2 in that order, but as far as games, the best console is the PS2, then the Xbox and then the GC.
Here are some facts for you: The Xbox and the GC both have slightly better graphics than the PS2. the PS2 has more good games than the Xbox and GC combined. And the lineup for the first half of next year, at least, doesn't seem to reverse the course
Well, if you ask me, that's exactly the person needed for the job. Virtually no engineer, or space buff for that matter, that is given 12K employees and tons of cash to play with, will make decisions that would turn NASA into a space promotion and facilitation agency. You need a bean counter to figure out that it just doesn't make sense to spend ALL that money in not-for-profit ventures. Sure, NASA is supposed to be scientifically profitable right now (with lots of arguments going against that statement in the last 10 years), but by now everyone realizes that it is the private sector that can run self sustained, profitable activities, where scientific achievement is usually followed by economic achievemnt.
Warning: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (111) in
Secret code error number 83: localhost, bfadmin.
Yes, that Turing sure was a complicated fellow...
Could the biggest problem with Linux usability be that most of the people teaching newbies to use Linux are too smart and know too much?"
I disagree. See there are three types of people that use computers. Those that thoroughly understand them. Those that use them for a little while and then "get it". And those that need to be taught.
I think the secret for a piece of software's popularity is to capture the second group. If linux was really as easy as it needs to be, it wouldn't need to be taught. Just like most people don't need someone to teach them how to use windows and most of its apps. It's the second group that make most users and eventually they drag along the third group.
I guess we agree to disagree then. The whole point of my post was that the technology unveiled today with SegwayHT is good enough and cheap enough to make the seemingly sci fi applications I suggest practical. I don't think that something that looks sci fi, or gee-wiz technology like you call it, is by any means unimportant just because of that fact.
My perception is that we disagree on how we might use the new technology, instead of it being possible or not (or feasible or not)
I'm of the opinion that enhancing human ability is far more productive than self contained technology that matches it or surpasses it. Of course this is a dilema that has been address by engineering and science long before we realized it existed, so we seem to have a valid argument here.
But then again, isn't a froklift a way to enhance human ability? isn't a tank? What's the difference between, say, a tank and a mech armor? form factor? humanoid form? likeness to Japanimation models? I personally think the guys that invented this stuff, from MazingerZ on (or whatever was the first vision of a mech armor) had a point and a good idea. Same point and idea I attribute to Clarke's geosynchronic satellites (wether he invented it or not), or Verne's submarine. In the end, it's gonna be good ol' fashion Supply and Demand that determines what becomes fact and what fiction.
BTW, please excuse my english. It's not my native language, although I'm working on it. And no, I'm not a US Citizen, but I am an American. I just live in a different country in the same continent as you do. And no, this doesn't affect my knowledge of the DoD, with whom I've worked with many times in the past as a contractor for telecomm services.
If you re-read my post, or even the part you quoted, I don't think they'll pick up this product, I think they might pick up the technology and further develop it into a different product. This they have done tons of times.
The idea is for it NOT to be more expensive than a Tank and a Mech armor wouldnt necessarily compete or replace one either.
Take today's conflict for example. You have marines in the ground in Kandahar. These are a small number of units that should produce high returns. If you can enhance their strength and protection at the same time, without restricting their ability to operate independantly (unlinke tanks that you can't fit inside an undeground cave), you gain something valuable. Furthermore, with enhanced strength you have the ability to carry a whole lot more firepower than a regular joe. In fact if this wasn't a desired technology, why is DARPA and several other DoD agencies spending tons of your tax dollars in researching this? I bet my email account that Kamen is gonna get a call from the DoD within the next month.
Besides, military is not the only useful application for Mech Armors. Think factories. Right now you need one of those expensive lifters (or whatever you call them) that lift heavy boxes, but can only operate in very standard environments (right box sizes, righ shelf sizes, right distance between shelves, etc.). If the cost of one of these armors is at least equal to those lifters, you have a winner since you save money elsewhere (Think the armor from the end of Alien 2).
Also, there're several applications for emergency situations, a la WTC, where these type of armor would have, perhaps, saved lives of those wearing them and of those beneath the rubble, since enhanced strength might have allowed for faster removal of large debris (of course, I can't be sure since i've never been to ground zero, but I can think of other disaster areas I've been to where this would have helped.
Again you're just showing a lack of vision similar to other posts that don't see value for some technology for them or their immedate surroundings, and automatically assume it's not valuable for anybody else.
I can't agree more. I know that by know this post will probably be read by about 3 people, but I need to say this anyways.
This IS a breakthrough and I can't believe it's not obvious to anyone. Think about how close this is to making a full blown mech armor. Nope, I'm not kidding. If you can have gyros and electronics that sample your movements at 100Hz, and motors that react accordingly, enhancing human strength via this technology should just be a matter of doing more of the same. This thing is 65lbs yet it moves effortlesstly on very little power. If anyone has seen Kamen's iBot, and the way it reacts to someone trying to knock you off it when in two wheel mode, you know what i'm talking about. It's that precise, and now it's widely available. This specific application might not be revolutionary but evolutionary, but the technology behind it is definetely a huge breakthrough.
Cmdr Taco, you claim you can shoot Mind Bullets and THEY are 12?