Like the cell batteries today are probably the result of the batteries put on the first voyager?
Or like finding new resources and materials to sustain us?
Nah. All of this is too practical. Since space research and exploration is run by the goverment the only hope we have is that our governemtn can do things for our safety. That's the common mantra these days from the goverment. Its for your safety. (Just like the on going argument that programers should be licensed--for your safety) Space research and exploration is not an exception.
I have a hard time believing that a little bitty personal device (like cd player or PDA or laptop) could cause such problems and yet other things which are much more powerful are not a problem.
For example, solar flares are known to cause radio disruptions and electronic interference. Yet we never hear that planes are grounded today because of a rise in solar flares. When's the last time a commerical airliner crashed because a solar flare?
If such little bitty eletronic distrubances are a problem you'd think that any time a plane flies between a satelite and its ground communications, the plane would go out of control and crash.
I think its an issue of revenue. The airlines would rather provide you with a service, like phone calls or music, and charge you for it. But if you're bringing in your own phones or CD players or movie player, well then their service is of no value to you and you won't be paying them for it.
I could also be an issue of a business model that is built on controling the customer more than anything else. Maybe I'm just parnoid.
I'ved usenet for almost as long as my career. I've used it for just about any topic: coding, politics, science, etc...I've noticed that I do not get the replies to my questions or comments that I use to get. Many now go with no responses.
I blame part of this on the changes in the work environment. So many places now have restrictions on what web sites one can visit.
Also blame those who exploited the system. It used to be that usenet was publically assesible and you could use any tool for reading the groups. These days you can only access usenet through your ISP, anyone else rejects you (except google via the web browser). And the ISP many times restricts which groups are available.
Kroger has agreed (Barnes and Nobles and a few other retailers have agreed as well) to provide shopping profiles of individual customers based use of their savings card.
Quoting from the same article: Prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from forcing companies that make or sell PCs or digital video products to include specific copy-protection technology in them.
When I first heard that there were bills in Congress that would require all computers hooked to the internet to have government approved DRM hardware/software and anything less would be illegal, I was very dismayed. I had pretty much decided that when such laws passes I will never another computer again--even to the determent of my career.
It is not right that some government bureucrat to tell me which operating system or motherboard I am allowed to use. It's my computer--it is up to me how I decide I should use it so that it best serves my intent. It is wrong to assume that I will become a law breaker simply because I own hardware or software that could do so.
(If my behaviors do actually break some moral law (like stealing a copyrighted work or destorying someone elses computer with a virus) then come and try me a court of law).
I also feared that such laws would destroy innovation.
I am relieved to see that the thinking in Congress may be changing. It's needed.
Quote from the original article:Some consumer groups argue that DRM infringes on the right to make "fair use" of copyrighted works and to back up legally purchased digital files.
This is the problem I have with most of the DRM solutions. It affects my ability to fairly use what I paid for.
For example, if I stick a CD in a CD player and turn it on, everyone in the house hears my music (even if they did not buy a copy of the CD themselves). If I put the CD in my PC and played it through my PC the outcome is the same--everyone in the house hears it. Yet, according to the RIAA and the DRM, the second method of play back is illegal and the music industry has the right to implement *tools* to stop it.
While I tend to agree that the forces of the market place should allowed to work, the current legistations with DRM have upset the balance and the power is in the RIAA hands not the consumer.
I think this is a good bill and it should begin the process to restore the power to consumer.
In the US, anyways, it seems like the real problem to getting to work at home is managment. Most managers think if they can't see you (wiggling your mouse around) then they can't know if you actually working.
Most IT management philosophies do not consider managing progress or productivity by the state of the code. They are based around managing hours a person works.
It's interesting to note that in the US sales organizations have done extremely well implementing work at home. I attribute this success to the fact that sales organgizations manage by results (sales $$$) not hours at the office.
I use those sites to find out the who and what for song. Typically I hear something on the radio but I don't know who is signing it. All I can remember is phrase from it. So I use those phrases to search the net and find the song title and band. All the music industry is doing to me is reducing the likelihood that I will buy another album.
> will be teaching a college class on the topic > of ethical dilemmas brought about by new > technology. Unfortunately, he doesn't keep up > with technology news
No offense intended to your relative.
This is the biggest gripe I have today about our education system. The people teaching it are not in the real world at all. They live in their world obivious to life as the rest of the world experiences it.
My ex-mother-in-law took a C++ class taught by an accounting professor. In home work assigments, he would provide base classes that the class had to use in their assigments. However, the base classes had syntax errors or were not really bases etc....it was terrible.
HD is 22 TVs in one (since most HD TVs are flat)
on
LCD Price Fixing?
·
· Score: 1
I used to work for Escient Labs writing software for settop boxes (we used BeOS or linux depending on the box). I figured this information would apply since most HD TVs are flat LCDs.
While I worked there, I learned that HD televisions had to support 22 different HD specifications. In other words, when you bought an HD TV you were really buying 22 of them as the manufactor could not predict which formats you would need at the time of manufactoring.
This was the result of an FCC decision in the early 90s. The FCC then demanded that all broadcasts be sent in HD by 2004 (in major markets and 2006 for the remainder--I think). But the FCC decided not to make a decision on which HD format would be required and decided the industry could duke it out. It is this decision that has caused so many delays in seeing HD reach the market.
Naturally, this made the cost much higher than nessecary.
Recently the FCC and the industry have agreed on a HD format. In theory, the HD TVs should now start to drop in price as the TV only has to support one format. How long that takes to reach the market is hard to say.
I tried to research the net for some links regarding this. Unfortuately I'm running out of time. I would appreciate some replies w/ such links if you have 'em.
Just remember, if legislation starts declaring programmers as engineers, then the next step will be requiring programmers to get licensed. No more programming jobs w/o local union approval too. No more coding at home and making some $$$ from it.
Various unions and government agencies have been trying for years to get programmers declared engineers. That means more revenue for them if they succeed and less job enjoyment for us IMO.
It is good to see these concerns elevated to the general public but I always keep this little thought in mind when I read about technology (especially internet related) the mainstream media.
I get the impression that the mainstream media is scared of the internet. I wonder if part of it due to changes in how we get our information. In the old days, we turned the TV to 1 of 3 or 4 channels and that was about it. Today, we can use search engines and countless news sites instead. So, the mainstream media feels threatened by the internet as it reduces their influence as well as their revenues.
I got the impression by how some journalist report their discoveries in a local channels expose on the internet. I remember one article where this journalist was inquiring about cookies websites leave behind and the information others can potentially garner from them. Her reaction was of shock! Her response was that a hapless computer user was totally helpless (no mention of turning off cookies for example) unless the government steps in and starts regulating cookies. As a result of this news article, I got the impression that the journalist was more afraid of the internet than anything else.
Office Despot will no longer get any of my business. Clearly Office Despot is not interesting in selling quality software but only that which offers the biggest payback.
Unfortuantly, small software vendors, open source and linux are affected. Windoze will continue to lumber on unhindered by competition.
I hope Office Despot falls flat on their face for this one.
I'm not kidding. I work for a major software publisher (who will remain anonymous so that I can keep my job) who as part of our annual design process include a design specification for an easter egg in the product. Even QA spends time testing the easter egg.
Since H202 can be used to make rocket fuel, some one could use for less scruplous purposes than the X-prize. I imagine that companies are getting parnoid (maybe even harassed) about selling H202 to anyone but the government. Companies may be even be afraid of getting sued (in the US anyways) if it turns out their products were used in the "commission of a crime".
The e-doctors were feeling very e-unimportant despite the e-ducation. So they start e-research in their e-labs and realized there's a lot of undocument e-illness that needed to be defined and brought the e-public's attention.
I gather that's the same car I'm talking about. The article I read a while ago (sorry I lost the link) was quite lengthy and went into the details. GM also felt that due to reduced number of moving parts, the car could be sold at prices cheaper than today's car. They also felt that its life could last 20 years, which is way they talked about the need to the cars "skinable".
I recently heard from someone that GM has decided to scrap the ability to swap out the body. I don't know if its true. But, IMHO, I'm disappointed if it is. I like that idea a lot.
At one time, GM talked about making the shell of the car easily changable. The idea behind it was if you wanted a sporty look one day, you take off the current shell and attach the sport shell. What every happened to this concept? Is it still alive or has GM abandoned it?
Why add laws to an industry that works? Consumers (the individual needing computer repair, for example) are not asking that the techicians be licensed. The system works. And if things change and the consumer wants licensed technicans, then the technicans will become licensed or else they wont have work.
Making a law requiring some type of licensing does not ensure quality work either. Someone can follow the regulations and pass a few tests. This does not mean that they will care about you (the consumer), your needs and give you what you want.
The government is never the optimal solution. It does not have good answers for everything. And it does not apply them effectively. Look at the process for getting your driver license renewed (in most of the US). Do you like those long lines, insensitive clerks and hours of operation that don't fit your needs?
Why would we want computer repair becoming like the DMV?
Slashdot Mirror
How about because we gain something from it?
Like the cell batteries today are probably the result of the batteries put on the first voyager?
Or like finding new resources and materials to sustain us?
Nah. All of this is too practical. Since space research and exploration is run by the goverment the only hope we have is that our governemtn can do things for our safety. That's the common mantra these days from the goverment. Its for your safety. (Just like the on going argument that programers should be licensed--for your safety) Space research and exploration is not an exception.
Bah Hum Bug!
I have a hard time believing that a little bitty personal device (like cd player or PDA or laptop) could cause such problems and yet other things which are much more powerful are not a problem.
For example, solar flares are known to cause radio disruptions and electronic interference. Yet we never hear that planes are grounded today because of a rise in solar flares. When's the last time a commerical airliner crashed because a solar flare?
If such little bitty eletronic distrubances are a problem you'd think that any time a plane flies between a satelite and its ground communications, the plane would go out of control and crash.
I think its an issue of revenue. The airlines would rather provide you with a service, like phone calls or music, and charge you for it. But if you're bringing in your own phones or CD players or movie player, well then their service is of no value to you and you won't be paying them for it.
I could also be an issue of a business model that is built on controling the customer more than anything else. Maybe I'm just parnoid.
I'ved usenet for almost as long as my career. I've used it for just about any topic: coding, politics, science, etc...I've noticed that I do not get the replies to my questions or comments that I use to get. Many now go with no responses.
I blame part of this on the changes in the work environment. So many places now have restrictions on what web sites one can visit.
Also blame those who exploited the system. It used to be that usenet was publically assesible and you could use any tool for reading the groups. These days you can only access usenet through your ISP, anyone else rejects you (except google via the web browser). And the ISP many times restricts which groups are available.
it was built completely from scratch in the desert, on the side of the mountain, in the rain while walking up hill with no shoes.
Kroger has agreed (Barnes and Nobles and a few other retailers have agreed as well) to provide shopping profiles of individual customers based use of their savings card.
See this for moreInformation.
I would like add one additional comment too:
Quoting from the same article: Prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from forcing companies that make or sell PCs or digital video products to include specific copy-protection technology in them.
When I first heard that there were bills in Congress that would require all computers hooked to the internet to have government approved DRM hardware/software and anything less would be illegal, I was very dismayed. I had pretty much decided that when such laws passes I will never another computer again--even to the determent of my career.
It is not right that some government bureucrat to tell me which operating system or motherboard I am allowed to use. It's my computer--it is up to me how I decide I should use it so that it best serves my intent. It is wrong to assume that I will become a law breaker simply because I own hardware or software that could do so.
(If my behaviors do actually break some moral law (like stealing a copyrighted work or destorying someone elses computer with a virus) then come and try me a court of law).
I also feared that such laws would destroy innovation.
I am relieved to see that the thinking in Congress may be changing. It's needed.
Quote from the original article:Some consumer groups argue that DRM infringes on the right to make "fair use" of copyrighted works and to back up legally purchased digital files.
This is the problem I have with most of the DRM solutions. It affects my ability to fairly use what I paid for.
For example, if I stick a CD in a CD player and turn it on, everyone in the house hears my music (even if they did not buy a copy of the CD themselves). If I put the CD in my PC and played it through my PC the outcome is the same--everyone in the house hears it. Yet, according to the RIAA and the DRM, the second method of play back is illegal and the music industry has the right to implement *tools* to stop it.
While I tend to agree that the forces of the market place should allowed to work, the current legistations with DRM have upset the balance and the power is in the RIAA hands not the consumer.
I think this is a good bill and it should begin the process to restore the power to consumer.
That seems really cheap ($4.5 USD) for boat of that size and function.
Check out these prices for a variety of boats for sale. $4.5 mil buys a much smaller in some cases.
In the US, anyways, it seems like the real problem to getting to work at home is managment. Most managers think if they can't see you (wiggling your mouse around) then they can't know if you actually working.
Most IT management philosophies do not consider managing progress or productivity by the state of the code. They are based around managing hours a person works.
It's interesting to note that in the US sales organizations have done extremely well implementing work at home. I attribute this success to the fact that sales organgizations manage by results (sales $$$) not hours at the office.
I use those sites to find out the who and what for song. Typically I hear something on the radio but I don't know who is signing it. All I can remember is phrase from it. So I use those phrases to search the net and find the song title and band. All the music industry is doing to me is reducing the likelihood that I will buy another album.
Has anyone heard anything about Windows Media Player 9?
I'm concerned that its got a lot of snooping code in it, DRM stuff and etc...seems like when 8 came out there was some concerns.
> will be teaching a college class on the topic
> of ethical dilemmas brought about by new
> technology. Unfortunately, he doesn't keep up
> with technology news
No offense intended to your relative.
This is the biggest gripe I have today about our education system. The people teaching it are not in the real world at all. They live in their world obivious to life as the rest of the world experiences it.
My ex-mother-in-law took a C++ class taught by an accounting professor. In home work assigments, he would provide base classes that the class had to use in their assigments. However, the base classes had syntax errors or were not really bases etc....it was terrible.
I used to work for Escient Labs writing software for settop boxes (we used BeOS or linux depending on the box). I figured this information would apply since most HD TVs are flat LCDs.
While I worked there, I learned that HD televisions had to support 22 different HD specifications. In other words, when you bought an HD TV you were really buying 22 of them as the manufactor could not predict which formats you would need at the time of manufactoring.
This was the result of an FCC decision in the early 90s. The FCC then demanded that all broadcasts be sent in HD by 2004 (in major markets and 2006 for the remainder--I think). But the FCC decided not to make a decision on which HD format would be required and decided the industry could duke it out. It is this decision that has caused so many delays in seeing HD reach the market.
Naturally, this made the cost much higher than nessecary.
Recently the FCC and the industry have agreed on a HD format. In theory, the HD TVs should now start to drop in price as the TV only has to support one format. How long that takes to reach the market is hard to say.
I tried to research the net for some links regarding this. Unfortuately I'm running out of time. I would appreciate some replies w/ such links if you have 'em.
Just remember, if legislation starts declaring programmers as engineers, then the next step will be requiring programmers to get licensed. No more programming jobs w/o local union approval too. No more coding at home and making some $$$ from it.
Various unions and government agencies have been trying for years to get programmers declared engineers. That means more revenue for them if they succeed and less job enjoyment for us IMO.
It is good to see these concerns elevated to the general public but I always keep this little thought in mind when I read about technology (especially internet related) the mainstream media.
I get the impression that the mainstream media is scared of the internet. I wonder if part of it due to changes in how we get our information. In the old days, we turned the TV to 1 of 3 or 4 channels and that was about it. Today, we can use search engines and countless news sites instead. So, the mainstream media feels threatened by the internet as it reduces their influence as well as their revenues.
I got the impression by how some journalist report their discoveries in a local channels expose on the internet. I remember one article where this journalist was inquiring about cookies websites leave behind and the information others can potentially garner from them. Her reaction was of shock! Her response was that a hapless computer user was totally helpless (no mention of turning off cookies for example) unless the government steps in and starts regulating cookies. As a result of this news article, I got the impression that the journalist was more afraid of the internet than anything else.
Office Despot will no longer get any of my business. Clearly Office Despot is not interesting in selling quality software but only that which offers the biggest payback.
Unfortuantly, small software vendors, open source and linux are affected. Windoze will continue to lumber on unhindered by competition.
I hope Office Despot falls flat on their face for this one.
I'm not kidding. I work for a major software publisher (who will remain anonymous so that I can keep my job) who as part of our annual design process include a design specification for an easter egg in the product. Even QA spends time testing the easter egg.
Since H202 can be used to make rocket fuel, some one could use for less scruplous purposes than the X-prize. I imagine that companies are getting parnoid (maybe even harassed) about selling H202 to anyone but the government. Companies may be even be afraid of getting sued (in the US anyways) if it turns out their products were used in the "commission of a crime".
The e-doctors were feeling very e-unimportant despite the e-ducation. So they start e-research in their e-labs and realized there's a lot of undocument e-illness that needed to be defined and brought the e-public's attention.
E
I gather that's the same car I'm talking about. The article I read a while ago (sorry I lost the link) was quite lengthy and went into the details. GM also felt that due to reduced number of moving parts, the car could be sold at prices cheaper than today's car. They also felt that its life could last 20 years, which is way they talked about the need to the cars "skinable".
I recently heard from someone that GM has decided to scrap the ability to swap out the body. I don't know if its true. But, IMHO, I'm disappointed if it is. I like that idea a lot.
Amen!
Duh! My comments above where supposed to go here. Moderate it as offtopic please.
At one time, GM talked about making the shell of the car easily changable. The idea behind it was if you wanted a sporty look one day, you take off the current shell and attach the sport shell. What every happened to this concept? Is it still alive or has GM abandoned it?
I know the current implementation for this fuel is rockets. My question is: could it be adapted to work in automobiles?
Maybe the automobile engine would have change (keep it a rocket, 0 to 60 1 sec) but that's OK IMO.
Why add laws to an industry that works? Consumers (the individual needing computer repair, for example) are not asking that the techicians be licensed. The system works. And if things change and the consumer wants licensed technicans, then the technicans will become licensed or else they wont have work.
Making a law requiring some type of licensing does not ensure quality work either. Someone can follow the regulations and pass a few tests. This does not mean that they will care about you (the consumer), your needs and give you what you want.
The government is never the optimal solution. It does not have good answers for everything. And it does not apply them effectively. Look at the process for getting your driver license renewed (in most of the US). Do you like those long lines, insensitive clerks and hours of operation that don't fit your needs?
Why would we want computer repair becoming like the DMV?