So, let me get this right, even though I've already paid a large sum of money (more than enough to cover the hardware and the 20 feet of cable needed to go from the sidewalk to my house), it still costs $30 a month to get the signal to my house!?
No, it costs less than $30. Comcast charges more so that they can cover their overhead (tech support, billing, advertising, marketing, business, etc) and still make a profit. Econ 101.
Also, don't forget that they charge for the convenience of having the cable already run to your house, and probably charge a flat rate whether you live in an apartment (cheap for them) or out in the sticks, and thus average the cost for their baseline.
My smartphone gets really hot just streaming YouTube or Pandora. I imagine streaming full on Google TV would require serious cooling.
I doubt this would be any hotter. While my Motorola Droid gets warm while doing constant streaming or gaming, it's still much cooler than my old feature phone got while charging.
I'd love an Android app for my phone that did nothing but the streaming content. Hello Hulu, without Flash!
Availability isn't the same as cultural standards for their use. One might assume that his university discouraged (either actively or through peer pressure) their use in class, and he is surprised that acceptable standards have changed.
It used to be that you excused yourself to the bathroom to use your smart phone, and using it when company was present was seen as disrespectful. Now blackberries are used in the middle of meetings, and teenagers text while carrying conversations with others in the room.
At least at my uni you can usually tell how respected the professor is by how many laptops/iPhones/random gadgets are being used in-class.
Or, at least how easy the class is. I knew 90% of the subject matter in my physics and chemistry classes, yet was forced to attend physics by electronic attendance. I just distracted myself until there was an interesting demonstration or an interactive question for participation points.
It's worth remembering the saying with data: "if you look hard enough, you can find anything you want to".
I was just thinking that this automation will save unscrupulous scientists all the trouble of fudging the models to make the prediction fit their expected results.
This patent idea is so ridiculus.
IMO, something patentable is a thing. I can see a pair of new-design siccors. I can understand a gene or even biotech seed. But software is not a thing. It doesn't exist.
Your definition is, unfortunately, different then from the general term. Processes have almost always been patentable, and aren't, themselves, 'things'.
The only difference then is if the process outputs something tangible (production process, gene patents) or not (algorithms, software).
Personally, I don't think software patents are any more 'broken' than other patents. I just think that when the patent office grants a ridiculous software patent, it's more egregious than a ridiculous device patent. It seems we'd be better fixing the process for awarding patents, rather than throwing away entire classes of patentable ideas just because they are ridiculous when broken.
Rather than add this on as an extra charge that might also affect a not insignificant portion of the population, just add extra years to a child pornographers sentence?
Oh wait, that sentence is already long enough to probably be life in prison? Then why do we need to tack on anything extra?
See my post above. Al Capone went to prison for tax evasion because sharges on racketeering, conspiracy, etc never stuck. It's the old tactic of charging the defendant with a bunch of crimes, so that even if one or two get dismissed the guy still goes to prison.
You may not be able to prove in court that the child porn is actually CP, but you might be able prove that he didn't declare it on a customs form.
What if my laptop is encrypted because of PCI compliance? What if it is against the law in my country for me to compromise confidential information, but now Australia demands to see it? Does this mean American businessmen can't travel ao Australia with company laptops?
It just means American Businessmen can't keep porn on their company-issued laptops. Let's hope the SEC doesn't have any business in Australia, they'd be even more ineffective!
Microsoft took a big risk with Longhorn and tried to write pretty much the whole OS in managed code (entirely different to everyone else) and it didn't pay off. Most of the delay came from throwing most of that work away and starting again back in native code.
Or, perhaps more accurately, of throwing away your whole codebase halfway through and restarting, and still expecting to meet your original deadline. If you expected it to take 4 years (for example), and find out your first year did nothing, you're now trying to complete a 4 year project in 3. Is it any wonder Vista had such difficulty?
Yeah because the consequences of jail time for in game murders is both sane and good for the player base. Yes that's an actual CSM member's position. You pod kill you go to pixel jail and stare at pixel bars.
I'm sure the consequences of that will be great for the game.
Assuming it required a bounty be placed and another player capture the murderer and deliver them to a jail (which would also be player-run), that seems entirely in-line with the intent of the game. If players want to create a government and enforce lawfulness in certain sectors of space, they can.
The big reason is that PSN doesn't moderate their community like XBL, partly because they don't have income to pay for moderators and partly because the publishers are expected to do the moderation. Thus, the cheater on the PS3 needs to be banned from every single game, whereas on XBL a single ban applies to their entire account. As well, the PS3 cheater can just get a new account (for free), whereas there is a monetary incentive to not get banned on XBL (you don't get refunded for time you were banned).
Of course, this change in PSN isn't going to change anything about this problem.
Of course, a completely arid and barren planet probably wouldn't have the necessary conditions for life to begin (primordial soup and all), so let's not focus there.
But no, absolutely bullshit. I don't have the license to generalize. At this point, you must start talking about "probability" of finding life".
Right, my quote should have had the word "likely" or "expected". The point being, if we're going to look for life we might as well focus our search on life similar to the only other life we are aware of. At least we know that life can be based on carbon and water. If it's a crap shoot anyway, might as well bet on the one we know is possible.
Though I like your "waste of time either way". It is fun only as a purely intellectual pursuit.
But that avoids the question asked about the privacy policy. In your case, your issue is with advertising, yet you admit to having no issue with them reading your private e-mail.
Because we are talking about where we should be looking for life. While it may well be possible for "life" to exist in any place imaginable, where we look is determined by what we define as life. The only life that we know exists is carbon based and relies on water. From that we can say firmly that life can possibly exist based on a different carbon-like molecule (silicon) and/or using a different solvent. That is as far as our knowledge of chemistry allows us to extrapolate.
This is much better said than my posts. We're just talking about probability of finding life, so we should look at locations that seem the most likely to be favorable (liquid solvent, atmosphere, relatively old star, etc) first. I think it's a waste of time either way, but from a purely intellectual standpoint, it's the only way that makes sense.
It's unlikely enough to assemble genetic material (DNA/RNA on Earth) in a protective sheath (lipid bilayer here) in a liquid, how much more unlikely in a gas? It also means that unlike a small pool which could collect the necessary elements to create compounds in necessary quantities, these components disperse quickly in a gas. That same effect that would make life react quickly (chemically) once present would also reduce their likelyhood of appearing at all.
It's also possible extra-terrestrial intelligence could be in the form of beings made from pure energy and living in the center of stars, but it doesn't seem like the place we should start to look for them...
Agreed. Given that no POI is attached to the DNA (aside from the DNA itself), that does a lot to assuage the privacy concerns. So, it's unlikely that you could be tracked down purely by the genome, unless you are the only member of a particular group (albinos, rare ethnic minority, peculiar eye/skin/hair color combination) on campus. In that case, one would certainly want assurances that those with access to the data put safeguards to prevent abuses like that.
Exactly, we should probably be looking for any form of liquid solvent, not just water. Of course, a completely arid and barren planet probably wouldn't have the necessary conditions for life to begin (primordial soup and all), so let's not focus there.
There were MANY games which were playable online under a silver subscription for free.
I was a support tech, want me to start breaking down the list of games Silver subscription users could play BEFORE 2008?
Yes please, I was unaware of any (aside from those that didn't use XBL for online).
Starting in 2008 Silver and Gold accounts lost distinction and Silver accounts were allowed to play all games online free.
Ummmmm, the only references that I can see to this are temporary offers, usually weekends, and one that ran for several arcade games for a couple of months. As far as I can tell, Silver users can only play online during these special offers. Have a link that proves me wrong? I'd love to get my fiance playing online without needing to buy her another account.
Slashdot Mirror
I never said it cost that much less. However, I doubt Comcast would charge $30 if their cost to provide was $30 or more.
So, let me get this right, even though I've already paid a large sum of money (more than enough to cover the hardware and the 20 feet of cable needed to go from the sidewalk to my house), it still costs $30 a month to get the signal to my house!?
No, it costs less than $30. Comcast charges more so that they can cover their overhead (tech support, billing, advertising, marketing, business, etc) and still make a profit. Econ 101.
Also, don't forget that they charge for the convenience of having the cable already run to your house, and probably charge a flat rate whether you live in an apartment (cheap for them) or out in the sticks, and thus average the cost for their baseline.
My smartphone gets really hot just streaming YouTube or Pandora. I imagine streaming full on Google TV would require serious cooling.
I doubt this would be any hotter. While my Motorola Droid gets warm while doing constant streaming or gaming, it's still much cooler than my old feature phone got while charging.
I'd love an Android app for my phone that did nothing but the streaming content. Hello Hulu, without Flash!
Availability isn't the same as cultural standards for their use. One might assume that his university discouraged (either actively or through peer pressure) their use in class, and he is surprised that acceptable standards have changed.
It used to be that you excused yourself to the bathroom to use your smart phone, and using it when company was present was seen as disrespectful. Now blackberries are used in the middle of meetings, and teenagers text while carrying conversations with others in the room.
At least at my uni you can usually tell how respected the professor is by how many laptops/iPhones/random gadgets are being used in-class.
Or, at least how easy the class is. I knew 90% of the subject matter in my physics and chemistry classes, yet was forced to attend physics by electronic attendance. I just distracted myself until there was an interesting demonstration or an interactive question for participation points.
It's worth remembering the saying with data: "if you look hard enough, you can find anything you want to".
I was just thinking that this automation will save unscrupulous scientists all the trouble of fudging the models to make the prediction fit their expected results.
This patent idea is so ridiculus. IMO, something patentable is a thing. I can see a pair of new-design siccors. I can understand a gene or even biotech seed. But software is not a thing. It doesn't exist.
Your definition is, unfortunately, different then from the general term. Processes have almost always been patentable, and aren't, themselves, 'things'.
The only difference then is if the process outputs something tangible (production process, gene patents) or not (algorithms, software).
Personally, I don't think software patents are any more 'broken' than other patents. I just think that when the patent office grants a ridiculous software patent, it's more egregious than a ridiculous device patent. It seems we'd be better fixing the process for awarding patents, rather than throwing away entire classes of patentable ideas just because they are ridiculous when broken.
Well, "Hello World" happens to be one of the very first programs ever made and has plenty of prior art.
That's never stopped patent offices from awarding a patent anyway.
Rather than add this on as an extra charge that might also affect a not insignificant portion of the population, just add extra years to a child pornographers sentence? Oh wait, that sentence is already long enough to probably be life in prison? Then why do we need to tack on anything extra?
See my post above. Al Capone went to prison for tax evasion because sharges on racketeering, conspiracy, etc never stuck. It's the old tactic of charging the defendant with a bunch of crimes, so that even if one or two get dismissed the guy still goes to prison.
You may not be able to prove in court that the child porn is actually CP, but you might be able prove that he didn't declare it on a customs form.
And if you didn't, then they find a way to peg the guy. I never said it would be easy, but it is another way to catch criminals.
Remember, Al Capone only went to prison for tax evasion. Maybe the child porn charges don't stick, but the one for lying on a customs form do?
What if my laptop is encrypted because of PCI compliance? What if it is against the law in my country for me to compromise confidential information, but now Australia demands to see it? Does this mean American businessmen can't travel ao Australia with company laptops?
It just means American Businessmen can't keep porn on their company-issued laptops. Let's hope the SEC doesn't have any business in Australia, they'd be even more ineffective!
Well, when they're caught later, if you can prove they lied on their customs form you can put them away for even longer.
Microsoft took a big risk with Longhorn and tried to write pretty much the whole OS in managed code (entirely different to everyone else) and it didn't pay off. Most of the delay came from throwing most of that work away and starting again back in native code.
Or, perhaps more accurately, of throwing away your whole codebase halfway through and restarting, and still expecting to meet your original deadline. If you expected it to take 4 years (for example), and find out your first year did nothing, you're now trying to complete a 4 year project in 3. Is it any wonder Vista had such difficulty?
Yeah because the consequences of jail time for in game murders is both sane and good for the player base. Yes that's an actual CSM member's position. You pod kill you go to pixel jail and stare at pixel bars.
I'm sure the consequences of that will be great for the game.
Assuming it required a bounty be placed and another player capture the murderer and deliver them to a jail (which would also be player-run), that seems entirely in-line with the intent of the game. If players want to create a government and enforce lawfulness in certain sectors of space, they can.
The big reason is that PSN doesn't moderate their community like XBL, partly because they don't have income to pay for moderators and partly because the publishers are expected to do the moderation. Thus, the cheater on the PS3 needs to be banned from every single game, whereas on XBL a single ban applies to their entire account. As well, the PS3 cheater can just get a new account (for free), whereas there is a monetary incentive to not get banned on XBL (you don't get refunded for time you were banned).
Of course, this change in PSN isn't going to change anything about this problem.
Of course, a completely arid and barren planet probably wouldn't have the necessary conditions for life to begin (primordial soup and all), so let's not focus there.
But no, absolutely bullshit. I don't have the license to generalize. At this point, you must start talking about "probability" of finding life".
Right, my quote should have had the word "likely" or "expected". The point being, if we're going to look for life we might as well focus our search on life similar to the only other life we are aware of. At least we know that life can be based on carbon and water. If it's a crap shoot anyway, might as well bet on the one we know is possible.
Though I like your "waste of time either way". It is fun only as a purely intellectual pursuit.
Yup.
"they" aren't reading it, a program/system is analyzing the content.
I know that, I'm just refering to what the GP said.
But that avoids the question asked about the privacy policy. In your case, your issue is with advertising, yet you admit to having no issue with them reading your private e-mail.
Because we are talking about where we should be looking for life. While it may well be possible for "life" to exist in any place imaginable, where we look is determined by what we define as life. The only life that we know exists is carbon based and relies on water. From that we can say firmly that life can possibly exist based on a different carbon-like molecule (silicon) and/or using a different solvent. That is as far as our knowledge of chemistry allows us to extrapolate.
This is much better said than my posts. We're just talking about probability of finding life, so we should look at locations that seem the most likely to be favorable (liquid solvent, atmosphere, relatively old star, etc) first. I think it's a waste of time either way, but from a purely intellectual standpoint, it's the only way that makes sense.
It's unlikely enough to assemble genetic material (DNA/RNA on Earth) in a protective sheath (lipid bilayer here) in a liquid, how much more unlikely in a gas? It also means that unlike a small pool which could collect the necessary elements to create compounds in necessary quantities, these components disperse quickly in a gas. That same effect that would make life react quickly (chemically) once present would also reduce their likelyhood of appearing at all.
It's also possible extra-terrestrial intelligence could be in the form of beings made from pure energy and living in the center of stars, but it doesn't seem like the place we should start to look for them...
Agreed. Given that no POI is attached to the DNA (aside from the DNA itself), that does a lot to assuage the privacy concerns. So, it's unlikely that you could be tracked down purely by the genome, unless you are the only member of a particular group (albinos, rare ethnic minority, peculiar eye/skin/hair color combination) on campus. In that case, one would certainly want assurances that those with access to the data put safeguards to prevent abuses like that.
And if you don't like it, just decline.
Exactly, we should probably be looking for any form of liquid solvent, not just water. Of course, a completely arid and barren planet probably wouldn't have the necessary conditions for life to begin (primordial soup and all), so let's not focus there.
IT does NOT add a 'lot more' traffic, or a 'lot more' complexity.
It add a minor bit of each.
As we can see, it adds enough complexity to open an additional potential security hole. For what?
Pretty windows on your server.
It's like putting doily drapes in your warehouse: it has no useful effect, yet marginally increases your fire hazard. Should be a no-brainer.
That doesn't change that the XBox was the first to be networked out of the box, without the need for an add-on.
There were MANY games which were playable online under a silver subscription for free.
I was a support tech, want me to start breaking down the list of games Silver subscription users could play BEFORE 2008?
Yes please, I was unaware of any (aside from those that didn't use XBL for online).
Starting in 2008 Silver and Gold accounts lost distinction and Silver accounts were allowed to play all games online free.
Ummmmm, the only references that I can see to this are temporary offers, usually weekends, and one that ran for several arcade games for a couple of months. As far as I can tell, Silver users can only play online during these special offers. Have a link that proves me wrong? I'd love to get my fiance playing online without needing to buy her another account.