Columbus was financed by the Pope, whose Crusaders had brought back to Rome documentation of West Africans going to and from the Western Hemisphere (bringing back gold), and the North African Eratosthenes' accurate calculation of the entire distance around the globe. Immediately prior to pitching Ferdinand and Isabella Columbus himself was stationed in the Cape Verde Islands, NW Africans whose folk stories recorded the West African trips.
The story that Columbus thought up an idea about a round world that the Spanish took a wild chance on backing, is a lie. Columbus was a fool who got lost on the way he'd been given, took almost twice as long as was necessary to get there, and died broke - ripped off by his sponsors. Along the way he did manage to kidnap and enslave the people who welcomed him the way they'd welcomed his predecessors who came in peaceful trade from Africa. Not to mention kick off at least a half millennium of global addiction to plants (starting with tobacco) that the people in the Western Hemisphere handled culturally in moderation, just one of so many crimes spearheaded by the tool of Medieval Christendom.
We absolutely must spend more $BILLIONS on this weapon. Even though we're going to finally permanently steal America's Social Security pension fund to pretend to pay for it. While we actually pay for it with more $BILLIONS we borrow from China.
China wouldn't be nearly the threat to the USA it is if we hadn't borrowed the $TRILLION we owe China to pay for weapons like this to protect us from China. As usual, the best national security is investing in developing our own citizens instead of spending on corporate contractors that profits our enemies.
What's more interesting to me is the Android@Home announcements (from Google IO 2011) that Google is implementing its own networking stack (instead of Zigbee) on 802.15.4. 802.15.4 is a very low power low-level radio network, with cheap embedded microcontrollers that are often ARM. There's probably not enough power in the node's ARM to run Android, but some nodes could have extra power and extra ARM cores that do run Android.
Android's Java means in addition to network RPC, code can be straightforwardly programmed to safely migrate around the network for distributed local execution near the data, whether that's network metadata, sensor data, or just the power of massively parallel distribution. I wonder whether JavaSpaces or something like it (probably a very lite version) will find a fit in making cheap distributed networks represented in computational tuplespace. Distributed around one's home, office/classroom or car, or among one's clothing (daily worn watch/jacket/shoes/belt/keyring), or eventually merging among those personal spaces as they're either near or just related (linked by the Internet).
Intel's x86 architecture still has too much power consumption (and the legacy HW baggage that consumes it) to be a design win for this distributed architecture. By the time x86 is suitably low power, Android will probably have defined the space of these smart spaces, and the smart things in them.
FWIW, there's still few details of A@H, though supposedly there is a reference implementation (network backbone embedded in LED bulbs). Anyone seen any specs, like whether it's really a SNAP/6LOWPAN hybrid, or which specific alternative Google is now pushing? Where to get the devkits (HW and SW)?
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around..
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, a library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around.
Can you believe that TCP/IP ping was named after the real world sonar ping that these apps are bringing to phones? Reality is so impressive when you use your brain.
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around.
I wonder how much of the surprise extra emissions came from BP's Macondo blowout in the Gulf of Mexico in Summer 2010. The volatiles from the oil and all the gas have partially dissolved in the Gulf, but probably much more eventually evaporated into the air. Where it can all be counted, unlike at the wellhead itself where BP's lawyers, engineers and politicians can hide it.
And not just Macondo. But also all the extra blowouts and other leaks that aren't reported at the wells. How about all the new gas drilling, all the fracking? Natgas adds about 17x the Greenhouse Effect of the equivalent amount of CO2.
The "mysterious" nature of the extra emissions means they're totally uncontrolled. Which means they're part of the energy industry's profit scenario (which has itself outpaced the "best-case scenario"). Which means we're doomed to do even more of it.
Unless we replace these filthy, corrupting petrofuels with geothermal and other sustainable energy production. NOW. Before it's too late, which is now closer than ever.
There's about 23 million tablets total sold so far, but as many were sold in 10/2011 as in all of 2010. Next year's market will probably be an additional 75 million tablets. Apple regaining to 75% of that would mean 56 million of the tablets would be iPads. Since 15 million are iPads now, that's another 50 million or so to sell.
A $450 iPad priced at $300 would cost Apple $150 each. 50 million would cost $7.5 billion. That's about 10% of the profits Apple has struggled so hard to accumulate over its entire lifetime, mostly gained during the period where it had the tablet market it created practically all to itself.
I don't think Apple will do it. Not just on the basic economics. But part of the Apple brand is the perception of high price, and the perception of high quality that many associate with that. I've been hearing that dynamic since the early 1980s, when a $1200 Apple ][+ was claimed to be better than my $550 Atari 400 because it cost more, since "if it weren't better, people wouldn't pay more for it". Even though Apple products come with quality hard to find in similarly priced competing gear, they come with a price to (at least nearly) match, which is part of the Apple formula.
I'd say Apple is more likely to buy a TV/movie studio, like Sony did, to enhance its content platform with its own original content. Maybe do something else transformational, like buy a studio full of content to give to Apple creators/consumers and give everyone the infrastructure to make their own streaming content - more focused than YouTube. Part of $85B could probably buy all the catalogs of all the major record labels, and do something similar for audio. Whatever it is, it'll probably happen within the next few years, as the new legend has it that's the horizon that Steve "Hari Selden" Jobs left plans for.
To be clear, all the content is downloaded without going through any BN server or network? Because that chokepoint of control might be benign now, but it's an architecture for standing between you and 3rd party content whenever BN changes its policy later.
Really. 44.8% Android to 27.4% iPhone is already dwindled, but when the huge hype of the iPhone 4S release produces only a 0.1% increase in market share, the months after initial release will doubtless show further dwindle.
The much smaller market segment that is tablets also shrank, from 75% to 67% iPad, while Android's share grew to 27%. The iPad lead is dwindling, and by the time tablets are as substantial a market segment as are smartphones, the iPad share's further shrinkage in the minority will contribute to the overall dwindling of Apple's share.
Apple is a great innovator, and a terrific survivor. But the company has never been much of a sustainer of market share. The diversity of large markets works against the total platform control that Apple always builds its products on, even as it helps Apple's kind of mass market but quality innovations and its tenacious survival. The middle phase is where most of the money is, and Microsoft and now Google (and its partners, the further development of the Microsoft corollary) come to dominate most of the time by owning it through relative openness.
Android's source of free content is the entire Internet. And also specifically YouTube. This is the Google way: increase access among the many Internet users, help them find their content (free and otherwise), and promote some stuff along with it as paid ads. YouTube content might mostly suck, but broadcast TV is mostly worse (and the ad model is much worse), and cable/satellite TV content people pay $50+ for each month is even worse than that. There's so much more YouTube and general Internet content than in paid media networks that there's something for everyone.
Android will do just fine, as it has been. Even as the free content improves, partly as Google gets more and more people producing, consuming and sharing the free stuff. If Google is really successful, iTunes, AMS, BN's new thing and all the other content stores will serve to Android as much as to any other device, just as free stuff gets served to iPhones, Kindles and Nooks.
Won't this tablet also be just a terminal for all content served by the BN servers, even if they pass through other content, as Amazon's Kindle Fire is? So all content is mediated by BN.
That's like buying a TV from CBS, to which CBS can send whatever "necessary" modifications to content from other TV networks. Yeah, it's like getting a cellphone locked into a single mobile carrier through which all calls are funneled. But look at how that's working out with cablemodems when the company is Comcast (and plenty of others): competing services, like downloaded movies or VOIP, get substandard service or worse. And any company can go the Comcast route any day it chooses.
It's not a joke if it's not funny. And certainly not when it's what millions of Republicans say every day to deny their giving us Bush/Cheney made the worst president of all time their fault.
I suppose that you're now using my logic to continue talking like a Republican. Not funny either.
BTW, they're not funny not because the truth is so bad, but because what you're saying just has no humor to it. If you can't tell, your sense of humor isn't up to the task of posting in public.
I'm already at 11.04, as I noted. If what you say is the only way, then I'm not upgrading to 11.10. If Ubuntu doesn't give me back my "legacy" Desktop in 12.04, I'm switching to a distro that will. And since a lot of other people will also do so, the advantage of "most popular Linux" will move away from Ubuntu - sooner than later.
I do remember several years ago GNOME tried some kind of stunt with File Open dialogs, and with Nautilus filesystem folders, that was fairly quickly reverted. That'll probably happen with Ubuntu. Or I'll switch, as I once switched to Ubuntu.
If there were a better email app than Evolution by default in some other distro that's no worse than Ubuntu, I'd probably switch to that now. I've had enough of Evolution, but all my many megabytes of mail and state indices are in it.
No, it was originally created for a nuclear war. But that was 50 years ago. The system has been substantially reinvented at least 3 times since then, of which the current testing is part of the latest change. The system currently warns of all kinds of emergencies, most commonly weather and other natural disasters.
The government knew the attacks were happening. The government had the info within an hour after the initial attacks that all planes were grounded, and that there were only the two targeted attacks. The government had spent all kinds of time and money modeling attacks including ones like that one (despite the CYA BS from Rice and other Bushers about "nobody could have anticipated"), including intel like that made into the August 6, 2001 PDB that anticipated this attack as likely coming soon.
Meanwhile news orgs were saying all kinds of stuff about the attacks immediately, much of which was wrong. The government should have used the EAS to announce the known facts, including the basic government response, to cut off such misinfo and give the public something to indicate our government was working to protect us, despite letting the attack occur. That is what the EAS is for.
Of course, this is the Bush/Cheney government that let New Orleans drown just a few years later. Their job was to discredit the government by spending its time and money on their cronies instead of the public. The EAS failure fits right in.
Yes, "The real story is that the media outlets covering 99%+ of the audience are part of the "coup" that daily damages our rights, and robs and kills us with our rights abandoned."
It's clear that emergency broadcasts must address data networks, including mobile phone networks. In fact the government has recently added broadcasts to the mobile phone networks. I'm surprised that there's been nothing I've heard of to force alert messages to Internet terminals of all kinds, since that's such a smooth way for government to force their way onto monitoring and controlling those terminals.
I thought the statement you made was far more interesting than the question you asked. In fact I thought your statement discredited you to the point where I wasn't interested in whether you had a question.
The answer to your question is what the military statement to the public was supposed to be in the event of such an attack. That attack was not the "nobody could have anticipated" BS that the Bush administration (especially Rice) worked on us. The military and various response agencies have simulated attacks like that for a long time. Their planned responses include public statements. None of which were announced over the EAS. If the problem was that the military did not provide the message for the EAS, then the difference is academic: that's the part of the EAS that failed.
I'm not the military with the budget, personnel and time to develop such a message in case of such an attack, but I can offer: "Planes have hit the World Trade Center in New York, and the Pentagon in DC. All air traffic nationwide has been halted, the military is deployed, the president is in command and the government is deploying its planned response." Even though the part about "the president is in command" would have been a lie.
Now you answer my question, that you have been avoiding: how did you know that the attack was "100% landed"? You didn't. That's why you're not answering my question.
Slashdot Mirror
Columbus was financed by the Pope, whose Crusaders had brought back to Rome documentation of West Africans going to and from the Western Hemisphere (bringing back gold), and the North African Eratosthenes' accurate calculation of the entire distance around the globe. Immediately prior to pitching Ferdinand and Isabella Columbus himself was stationed in the Cape Verde Islands, NW Africans whose folk stories recorded the West African trips.
The story that Columbus thought up an idea about a round world that the Spanish took a wild chance on backing, is a lie. Columbus was a fool who got lost on the way he'd been given, took almost twice as long as was necessary to get there, and died broke - ripped off by his sponsors. Along the way he did manage to kidnap and enslave the people who welcomed him the way they'd welcomed his predecessors who came in peaceful trade from Africa. Not to mention kick off at least a half millennium of global addiction to plants (starting with tobacco) that the people in the Western Hemisphere handled culturally in moderation, just one of so many crimes spearheaded by the tool of Medieval Christendom.
We absolutely must spend more $BILLIONS on this weapon. Even though we're going to finally permanently steal America's Social Security pension fund to pretend to pay for it. While we actually pay for it with more $BILLIONS we borrow from China.
China wouldn't be nearly the threat to the USA it is if we hadn't borrowed the $TRILLION we owe China to pay for weapons like this to protect us from China. As usual, the best national security is investing in developing our own citizens instead of spending on corporate contractors that profits our enemies.
"There is no dark side of the moon, really. As a matter of fact it's all dark." - Pink Floyd
Actually, there's only a "far side", which gets as much light as the rest throughout the Moon's orbits of the Earth and the Sun.
What's more interesting to me is the Android@Home announcements (from Google IO 2011) that Google is implementing its own networking stack (instead of Zigbee) on 802.15.4. 802.15.4 is a very low power low-level radio network, with cheap embedded microcontrollers that are often ARM. There's probably not enough power in the node's ARM to run Android, but some nodes could have extra power and extra ARM cores that do run Android.
Android's Java means in addition to network RPC, code can be straightforwardly programmed to safely migrate around the network for distributed local execution near the data, whether that's network metadata, sensor data, or just the power of massively parallel distribution. I wonder whether JavaSpaces or something like it (probably a very lite version) will find a fit in making cheap distributed networks represented in computational tuplespace. Distributed around one's home, office/classroom or car, or among one's clothing (daily worn watch/jacket/shoes/belt/keyring), or eventually merging among those personal spaces as they're either near or just related (linked by the Internet).
Intel's x86 architecture still has too much power consumption (and the legacy HW baggage that consumes it) to be a design win for this distributed architecture. By the time x86 is suitably low power, Android will probably have defined the space of these smart spaces, and the smart things in them.
FWIW, there's still few details of A@H, though supposedly there is a reference implementation (network backbone embedded in LED bulbs). Anyone seen any specs, like whether it's really a SNAP/6LOWPAN hybrid, or which specific alternative Google is now pushing? Where to get the devkits (HW and SW)?
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around..
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, a library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around.
Can you believe that TCP/IP ping was named after the real world sonar ping that these apps are bringing to phones? Reality is so impressive when you use your brain.
Is there an Android app (or, preferably, library) that can use the sonar to sense the size and rough shape of a whole room, making a 3D model? Maybe by correlating distance pings with the accelerometer (and GPS for added position context) while waving the device around.
I wonder how much of the surprise extra emissions came from BP's Macondo blowout in the Gulf of Mexico in Summer 2010. The volatiles from the oil and all the gas have partially dissolved in the Gulf, but probably much more eventually evaporated into the air. Where it can all be counted, unlike at the wellhead itself where BP's lawyers, engineers and politicians can hide it.
And not just Macondo. But also all the extra blowouts and other leaks that aren't reported at the wells. How about all the new gas drilling, all the fracking? Natgas adds about 17x the Greenhouse Effect of the equivalent amount of CO2.
The "mysterious" nature of the extra emissions means they're totally uncontrolled. Which means they're part of the energy industry's profit scenario (which has itself outpaced the "best-case scenario"). Which means we're doomed to do even more of it.
Unless we replace these filthy, corrupting petrofuels with geothermal and other sustainable energy production. NOW. Before it's too late, which is now closer than ever.
There's about 23 million tablets total sold so far, but as many were sold in 10/2011 as in all of 2010. Next year's market will probably be an additional 75 million tablets. Apple regaining to 75% of that would mean 56 million of the tablets would be iPads. Since 15 million are iPads now, that's another 50 million or so to sell.
A $450 iPad priced at $300 would cost Apple $150 each. 50 million would cost $7.5 billion. That's about 10% of the profits Apple has struggled so hard to accumulate over its entire lifetime, mostly gained during the period where it had the tablet market it created practically all to itself.
I don't think Apple will do it. Not just on the basic economics. But part of the Apple brand is the perception of high price, and the perception of high quality that many associate with that. I've been hearing that dynamic since the early 1980s, when a $1200 Apple ][+ was claimed to be better than my $550 Atari 400 because it cost more, since "if it weren't better, people wouldn't pay more for it". Even though Apple products come with quality hard to find in similarly priced competing gear, they come with a price to (at least nearly) match, which is part of the Apple formula.
I'd say Apple is more likely to buy a TV/movie studio, like Sony did, to enhance its content platform with its own original content. Maybe do something else transformational, like buy a studio full of content to give to Apple creators/consumers and give everyone the infrastructure to make their own streaming content - more focused than YouTube. Part of $85B could probably buy all the catalogs of all the major record labels, and do something similar for audio. Whatever it is, it'll probably happen within the next few years, as the new legend has it that's the horizon that Steve "Hari Selden" Jobs left plans for.
You're right - it's Java 8 that has closures, not Java 7.
You're like a horse that thinks it's a car. Or rather a cross between a horse and a mule, that thinks it's a cross between a car and a phone.
To be clear, all the content is downloaded without going through any BN server or network? Because that chokepoint of control might be benign now, but it's an architecture for standing between you and 3rd party content whenever BN changes its policy later.
They're talking about the display's response time, not the touch sensing. Is there a color e-ink that can display 30FPS?
Really. 44.8% Android to 27.4% iPhone is already dwindled, but when the huge hype of the iPhone 4S release produces only a 0.1% increase in market share, the months after initial release will doubtless show further dwindle.
The much smaller market segment that is tablets also shrank, from 75% to 67% iPad, while Android's share grew to 27%. The iPad lead is dwindling, and by the time tablets are as substantial a market segment as are smartphones, the iPad share's further shrinkage in the minority will contribute to the overall dwindling of Apple's share.
Apple is a great innovator, and a terrific survivor. But the company has never been much of a sustainer of market share. The diversity of large markets works against the total platform control that Apple always builds its products on, even as it helps Apple's kind of mass market but quality innovations and its tenacious survival. The middle phase is where most of the money is, and Microsoft and now Google (and its partners, the further development of the Microsoft corollary) come to dominate most of the time by owning it through relative openness.
Android's source of free content is the entire Internet. And also specifically YouTube. This is the Google way: increase access among the many Internet users, help them find their content (free and otherwise), and promote some stuff along with it as paid ads. YouTube content might mostly suck, but broadcast TV is mostly worse (and the ad model is much worse), and cable/satellite TV content people pay $50+ for each month is even worse than that. There's so much more YouTube and general Internet content than in paid media networks that there's something for everyone.
Android will do just fine, as it has been. Even as the free content improves, partly as Google gets more and more people producing, consuming and sharing the free stuff. If Google is really successful, iTunes, AMS, BN's new thing and all the other content stores will serve to Android as much as to any other device, just as free stuff gets served to iPhones, Kindles and Nooks.
Won't this tablet also be just a terminal for all content served by the BN servers, even if they pass through other content, as Amazon's Kindle Fire is? So all content is mediated by BN.
That's like buying a TV from CBS, to which CBS can send whatever "necessary" modifications to content from other TV networks. Yeah, it's like getting a cellphone locked into a single mobile carrier through which all calls are funneled. But look at how that's working out with cablemodems when the company is Comcast (and plenty of others): competing services, like downloaded movies or VOIP, get substandard service or worse. And any company can go the Comcast route any day it chooses.
It's not a joke if it's not funny. And certainly not when it's what millions of Republicans say every day to deny their giving us Bush/Cheney made the worst president of all time their fault.
I suppose that you're now using my logic to continue talking like a Republican. Not funny either.
BTW, they're not funny not because the truth is so bad, but because what you're saying just has no humor to it. If you can't tell, your sense of humor isn't up to the task of posting in public.
I'm already at 11.04, as I noted. If what you say is the only way, then I'm not upgrading to 11.10. If Ubuntu doesn't give me back my "legacy" Desktop in 12.04, I'm switching to a distro that will. And since a lot of other people will also do so, the advantage of "most popular Linux" will move away from Ubuntu - sooner than later.
I do remember several years ago GNOME tried some kind of stunt with File Open dialogs, and with Nautilus filesystem folders, that was fairly quickly reverted. That'll probably happen with Ubuntu. Or I'll switch, as I once switched to Ubuntu.
If there were a better email app than Evolution by default in some other distro that's no worse than Ubuntu, I'd probably switch to that now. I've had enough of Evolution, but all my many megabytes of mail and state indices are in it.
I didn't say it's not needed. What I said is that a system that fails like what we've got failed is not needed. Because a working one is needed.
You should read my actual posts, instead of the rorschach in your head.
No, it was originally created for a nuclear war. But that was 50 years ago. The system has been substantially reinvented at least 3 times since then, of which the current testing is part of the latest change. The system currently warns of all kinds of emergencies, most commonly weather and other natural disasters.
The government knew the attacks were happening. The government had the info within an hour after the initial attacks that all planes were grounded, and that there were only the two targeted attacks. The government had spent all kinds of time and money modeling attacks including ones like that one (despite the CYA BS from Rice and other Bushers about "nobody could have anticipated"), including intel like that made into the August 6, 2001 PDB that anticipated this attack as likely coming soon.
Meanwhile news orgs were saying all kinds of stuff about the attacks immediately, much of which was wrong. The government should have used the EAS to announce the known facts, including the basic government response, to cut off such misinfo and give the public something to indicate our government was working to protect us, despite letting the attack occur. That is what the EAS is for.
Of course, this is the Bush/Cheney government that let New Orleans drown just a few years later. Their job was to discredit the government by spending its time and money on their cronies instead of the public. The EAS failure fits right in.
Yes, "The real story is that the media outlets covering 99%+ of the audience are part of the "coup" that daily damages our rights, and robs and kills us with our rights abandoned."
It's clear that emergency broadcasts must address data networks, including mobile phone networks. In fact the government has recently added broadcasts to the mobile phone networks. I'm surprised that there's been nothing I've heard of to force alert messages to Internet terminals of all kinds, since that's such a smooth way for government to force their way onto monitoring and controlling those terminals.
I thought the statement you made was far more interesting than the question you asked. In fact I thought your statement discredited you to the point where I wasn't interested in whether you had a question.
The answer to your question is what the military statement to the public was supposed to be in the event of such an attack. That attack was not the "nobody could have anticipated" BS that the Bush administration (especially Rice) worked on us. The military and various response agencies have simulated attacks like that for a long time. Their planned responses include public statements. None of which were announced over the EAS. If the problem was that the military did not provide the message for the EAS, then the difference is academic: that's the part of the EAS that failed.
I'm not the military with the budget, personnel and time to develop such a message in case of such an attack, but I can offer: "Planes have hit the World Trade Center in New York, and the Pentagon in DC. All air traffic nationwide has been halted, the military is deployed, the president is in command and the government is deploying its planned response." Even though the part about "the president is in command" would have been a lie.
Now you answer my question, that you have been avoiding: how did you know that the attack was "100% landed"? You didn't. That's why you're not answering my question.
Are you talking to me? I'm not the one in this thread who said anything paranoid, the poster to whom I replied said so.
It's nice of you to offer your drugs to me, but you should share them with the other guy. The drugs they're using are making them hyperactive.