Absolutely. In fact, this is a question which has already been answered by codified law (21 CFR) and has an entire branch of the FDA already involved in software (CDRH - center for devices and radiological health).
When is software a device?
'an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article, including a component part, or accessory which is:
- recognized in the official National Formulary, or the United States Pharmacopoeia, or any supplement to them,
- intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, in man or other animals, or
- intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals, and which does not achieve any of it's primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and which is not dependent upon being metabolized for the achievement of any of its primary intended purposes.'
That means the FDA could drop a big hammer on any one of these already available apps which fall into these criteria as they've failed to put out a IND or NDA (innovative new drug / new drug application).
Will they? Probably not unless an adverse event (someone gets hurt) or politics force them into it (or both). The FDA is way under strength to meet their mandate.
Desperation? Not as in the case of survival. MS is extremely diversified on the software front and still has the defacto standard software for a majority of business applications (OS included). The only thing they might be desperate about is that other people are making money in a field to which MS has a relatively low barrier for entry. So, rather than calling them desperate, I'd suggest that they're really excited to enter a market that they're well poised to kick butt in. There's a decent chance they'll screw up the first iteration - but there's also a decent chance they've already done that (Win Phone 7).
If MS does Windows 8 right, they'll put the death nails in RIM's coffin while simultaneously slapping Android and iOS out of the business field entirely. A well implemented remote desktop alone could make that happen. Once MS has business adoption, education/private users will migrate to something that's most relevant/familiar. The existing mobile OSs will slowly fade to niche markets for those who like trendy items or those who like to tinker under the chassis (and I don't think I need to mention which is apple and which is linux).
So, in summary, MS is well poised to repeat the desktop successes of the '80s and 90's in the mobile market. They weren't Atari, Commodore, or Apple, (or even IBM), but MS won the day and (after a lot of development) they have quality product and a secure hold on the desktop market - the only thing they need to worry about is whether they can translate their dominance into a new hardware architecture. Worst case scenario: they screw up Windows 8 and don't manage world dominance until Windows 9. Unless iOS or Android are willing to license PC interface technology from MS (which would be a different type of win), MS has nothing to worry about. If anything, the only thing MS has to be desperate about is making Windows 7 another XP.
Nah - that's just fruit. The Apple trademark has seen clear delineation in the courts to apply to only certain types of computers. They've promised to stay away from any other industry, like music for an explicit example. Which is a good thing, because if they ever violated past trademark agreements, I'm sure whatever they developed wouldn't even have wireless or any storage space - it'd be totally lame.
Actually, higher level math is very useful in coming up with a far more efficient algorithm for all sorts of modeling, data analysis, and realistic graphics. Numerical methods can brute force all sorts of calculations, but there's nothing better for efficiency than supplying an analytical solution to a non selfadjoint EVP.
However, the ability to understand what those heavy lifting modules/programs do will be the difference between mastery and mediocrity within the field.
For example, much of what everyone sees and does on a day to day basis is governed by first and second order differential equations (a medium to medium-advanced mathematics field). While very few people go think about differential equations while in stop and go traffic, heating up food, or any number of other tasks - an understanding of the math lets people realize why following distance is so important or how come the pan/barbeque heats up the way it does.
It's true that there are very few fields which use higher level math (especially of varying types) on a day to day basis, but the foundation to understanding most technical fields is rooted in the higher level math - including programming. Basic math can be important too. Besides, the really fun hot-and-sexy types of programming jobs do need the math.
(Can you explain how a computer works? From the starting-point of electric potential, band-gaps, and logic operations? Most people can't, and indeed don't need to, but a mastery of the subject does need it (so throw in chemistry and physics). If you want an easy way to learn low level computing, pick up Minecraft and play around with red torches:)
That only works if the value of your scam is greater than the potential earnings your good reputation could net. It's a quick payoff, but chances are that you could make more in the long run with a continuous business as a reputable dealer (pun not intended). Of course, if the model isn't good enough to make money on it's own - just good enough to entice others in... well then you'd better have madoff with the money before the pyramid collapses (pun intended).
Care? Yes, especially if they're kids at the start of a lifetime of poor choices. Have the resources to dedicate to every case of juvenile stupidity? No - and I bet they regret it.
In fact, I'd say they care far more about that kid than the big dealer or manufacturer - for them, I suspect it's an entirely different passion that's involved (although directly related to the care for said kid).
Now, I've never played around with any of the silk road stuff (or much of the onion style websites for that matter), but I thought they used a private/public key system for identity verification. If so, I'd disagree with the accuracy of both your and the summary's statement that no real identities are used. As I understand the system, real digital identifications are used with far more authentication than is inherent with a given name. It's only anonymous insomuch as you don't know the meat-space person who's signing their end of the key. Assuming the other person has good habits with their private keys and pass-phrases, this is about as good of a real identity verification that you can get over the internet. It's the same principal as is behind GPG/PGP or any peering trust system. A meat-space name is rather irrelevant to internet identity - the reality is in the digital identity.
Perhaps we should have a press-blackout on any undesirable or criminal element of society? No more news about terrorist strikes, deaths in military action, political protests which disrupt traffic, the homeless (vagrancy), or the actions of members of congress. Thus we could all live in a happy carefree world where inherently good people never succumb to famous degenerate modeled behavior?
She (I believe), and dressing like your boss's boss (or your boss's boss's boss...) is, kissing up. Either way, too much kissing up will get you into something deep, from one side or the other.
I'd say, ask you boss what is required for you to wear. If he's ok with jeans and tshirts, go for it.
No. If you boss recommends jeans and t-shirts, because that's a company culture thing, then and only then go for it. Otherwise dress at least one step up from those you supervise, or better yet at an equivalent step to what your new supervisors are wearing.
People are visual animals and a very large portion of behavioral queues are completely sub-conscious. The phrase "clothes make the man" may be disturbing from an intellectual standpoint, but it's entirely accurate from a human-reality standpoint. Do some experimentation - attend various service locations in differing levels of dress and pay attention to the body language and other sub-conscious queues you're given.* You should want those you supervise to unconsciously look up to you, and you may also want your new supervisors to think of you as one of their peers. It's the uniform of the professional - it's not very different than the blue coveralls a mechanic wears in the shop. Sorry, but the days of this are gone.
* You might want to check your jurisdiction's laws before experimenting much with a negative control.
Dude - I know what you mean. Sure, even a perfect/. editor can sometimes miss something during a submission, but this is going too far! Even after a double take it still says that Comcast did something other than going out of their way to screw their customers. That's it, I'm turning in my Slashdot license and actually reading this article. I'm also going to pinch myself, and if I don't wake up, start holding my breath.
Really? Would you like to give a list of trivial patents? Please do correct for bias on determining the simplicity of the idea when observed after the fact. I mean after all, the Franklin Stove was dead obvious, and even the Spinning Jenny was merely a rearrangements of wheels, cogs, and water wheels - each of which was well understood at the time. Logic gates? Pshaw - anyone can see they're a natural extension of a transistor (which is merely a trinket to even a doped chemist or physicist).
Yes, I agree it's broken, but please don't whip out asinine suggestions unless you want your arguments forcibly dismissed by the people you may need to listen to them. Or at least try to suggest a (remotely) plausible method for doing so (e.g. It's time to establish a post-patent review board to evaluate the granted monopoly's innovation by X magnitude in a field which is Y mature to determine whether f(x,y) = trivial).
What do you mean if? You don't even have to read the article - the two sentence summary states that the patent was granted.
And who cares about Facebook, who still has time to license the patent, when someone like Valve (i.e. Steam) is already infringing at the infrastructure level.
Sure, you and everyone else (including myself) may think the patent is over broad, obvious, and non-innovative - but where were we (and Valve, Facebook, Apple, GoG, Microsoft, Walmart, etc...) during the 2008 public comment period?
No way - once we realize the bacterial version are self aware, we can start an eukaryote version that the single celled bacterial networks can have an arms race against!
I'd be interested in having the (cooled down) hot water lines in my house purged when I walk into the bathroom in the morning, or the kitchen preparing and cooking my dinner to be ready when my car tells it I'll be home. For that matter, I'd be interested in reading a book all the way home while my car navigated, accident free, through smoothly flowing optimized traffic. Waving at my computer to make 3-D spatial adjustments instead of using a planar pointer just sounds like a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
When is software a device?
That means the FDA could drop a big hammer on any one of these already available apps which fall into these criteria as they've failed to put out a IND or NDA (innovative new drug / new drug application).
Will they? Probably not unless an adverse event (someone gets hurt) or politics force them into it (or both). The FDA is way under strength to meet their mandate.
Desperation? Not as in the case of survival. MS is extremely diversified on the software front and still has the defacto standard software for a majority of business applications (OS included). The only thing they might be desperate about is that other people are making money in a field to which MS has a relatively low barrier for entry. So, rather than calling them desperate, I'd suggest that they're really excited to enter a market that they're well poised to kick butt in. There's a decent chance they'll screw up the first iteration - but there's also a decent chance they've already done that (Win Phone 7).
If MS does Windows 8 right, they'll put the death nails in RIM's coffin while simultaneously slapping Android and iOS out of the business field entirely. A well implemented remote desktop alone could make that happen. Once MS has business adoption, education/private users will migrate to something that's most relevant/familiar. The existing mobile OSs will slowly fade to niche markets for those who like trendy items or those who like to tinker under the chassis (and I don't think I need to mention which is apple and which is linux).
So, in summary, MS is well poised to repeat the desktop successes of the '80s and 90's in the mobile market. They weren't Atari, Commodore, or Apple, (or even IBM), but MS won the day and (after a lot of development) they have quality product and a secure hold on the desktop market - the only thing they need to worry about is whether they can translate their dominance into a new hardware architecture. Worst case scenario: they screw up Windows 8 and don't manage world dominance until Windows 9. Unless iOS or Android are willing to license PC interface technology from MS (which would be a different type of win), MS has nothing to worry about. If anything, the only thing MS has to be desperate about is making Windows 7 another XP.
Nah - that's just fruit. The Apple trademark has seen clear delineation in the courts to apply to only certain types of computers. They've promised to stay away from any other industry, like music for an explicit example. Which is a good thing, because if they ever violated past trademark agreements, I'm sure whatever they developed wouldn't even have wireless or any storage space - it'd be totally lame.
Actually, higher level math is very useful in coming up with a far more efficient algorithm for all sorts of modeling, data analysis, and realistic graphics. Numerical methods can brute force all sorts of calculations, but there's nothing better for efficiency than supplying an analytical solution to a non selfadjoint EVP.
However, the ability to understand what those heavy lifting modules/programs do will be the difference between mastery and mediocrity within the field.
For example, much of what everyone sees and does on a day to day basis is governed by first and second order differential equations (a medium to medium-advanced mathematics field). While very few people go think about differential equations while in stop and go traffic, heating up food, or any number of other tasks - an understanding of the math lets people realize why following distance is so important or how come the pan/barbeque heats up the way it does.
It's true that there are very few fields which use higher level math (especially of varying types) on a day to day basis, but the foundation to understanding most technical fields is rooted in the higher level math - including programming. Basic math can be important too. Besides, the really fun hot-and-sexy types of programming jobs do need the math.
(Can you explain how a computer works? From the starting-point of electric potential, band-gaps, and logic operations? Most people can't, and indeed don't need to, but a mastery of the subject does need it (so throw in chemistry and physics). If you want an easy way to learn low level computing, pick up Minecraft and play around with red torches :)
Dyslexia
While not the best, it's decent and by far the most widely available (of the fonts dyslexics find easier to read).
That only works if the value of your scam is greater than the potential earnings your good reputation could net. It's a quick payoff, but chances are that you could make more in the long run with a continuous business as a reputable dealer (pun not intended). Of course, if the model isn't good enough to make money on it's own - just good enough to entice others in... well then you'd better have madoff with the money before the pyramid collapses (pun intended).
And a wireless money transfer between separate currencies without paying the crazy rates banks/western union/etc... charge.
Care? Yes, especially if they're kids at the start of a lifetime of poor choices. Have the resources to dedicate to every case of juvenile stupidity? No - and I bet they regret it.
In fact, I'd say they care far more about that kid than the big dealer or manufacturer - for them, I suspect it's an entirely different passion that's involved (although directly related to the care for said kid).
Now, I've never played around with any of the silk road stuff (or much of the onion style websites for that matter), but I thought they used a private/public key system for identity verification. If so, I'd disagree with the accuracy of both your and the summary's statement that no real identities are used. As I understand the system, real digital identifications are used with far more authentication than is inherent with a given name. It's only anonymous insomuch as you don't know the meat-space person who's signing their end of the key. Assuming the other person has good habits with their private keys and pass-phrases, this is about as good of a real identity verification that you can get over the internet. It's the same principal as is behind GPG/PGP or any peering trust system. A meat-space name is rather irrelevant to internet identity - the reality is in the digital identity.
Perhaps we should have a press-blackout on any undesirable or criminal element of society? No more news about terrorist strikes, deaths in military action, political protests which disrupt traffic, the homeless (vagrancy), or the actions of members of congress. Thus we could all live in a happy carefree world where inherently good people never succumb to famous degenerate modeled behavior?
She (I believe), and dressing like your boss's boss (or your boss's boss's boss...) is, kissing up. Either way, too much kissing up will get you into something deep, from one side or the other.
I'd say, ask you boss what is required for you to wear. If he's ok with jeans and tshirts, go for it.
No. If you boss recommends jeans and t-shirts, because that's a company culture thing, then and only then go for it. Otherwise dress at least one step up from those you supervise, or better yet at an equivalent step to what your new supervisors are wearing.
People are visual animals and a very large portion of behavioral queues are completely sub-conscious. The phrase "clothes make the man" may be disturbing from an intellectual standpoint, but it's entirely accurate from a human-reality standpoint. Do some experimentation - attend various service locations in differing levels of dress and pay attention to the body language and other sub-conscious queues you're given.* You should want those you supervise to unconsciously look up to you, and you may also want your new supervisors to think of you as one of their peers. It's the uniform of the professional - it's not very different than the blue coveralls a mechanic wears in the shop. Sorry, but the days of this are gone.
* You might want to check your jurisdiction's laws before experimenting much with a negative control.
Wait, this wasn't a historical account?
And kids on the lawn!
That might have actually worked if they did the product trial in a different part of the world.
Is hostel a EU spelling of hotel? Not familiar with the hostel spelling. YOu said it more than once, so guessing it isn't just a typo....
And that sums up the situation with US hostels.
Dude - I know what you mean. Sure, even a perfect /. editor can sometimes miss something during a submission, but this is going too far! Even after a double take it still says that Comcast did something other than going out of their way to screw their customers. That's it, I'm turning in my Slashdot license and actually reading this article. I'm also going to pinch myself, and if I don't wake up, start holding my breath.
Really? Would you like to give a list of trivial patents? Please do correct for bias on determining the simplicity of the idea when observed after the fact. I mean after all, the Franklin Stove was dead obvious, and even the Spinning Jenny was merely a rearrangements of wheels, cogs, and water wheels - each of which was well understood at the time. Logic gates? Pshaw - anyone can see they're a natural extension of a transistor (which is merely a trinket to even a doped chemist or physicist).
Yes, I agree it's broken, but please don't whip out asinine suggestions unless you want your arguments forcibly dismissed by the people you may need to listen to them. Or at least try to suggest a (remotely) plausible method for doing so (e.g. It's time to establish a post-patent review board to evaluate the granted monopoly's innovation by X magnitude in a field which is Y mature to determine whether f(x,y) = trivial).
What do you mean if? You don't even have to read the article - the two sentence summary states that the patent was granted.
And who cares about Facebook, who still has time to license the patent, when someone like Valve (i.e. Steam) is already infringing at the infrastructure level.
Sure, you and everyone else (including myself) may think the patent is over broad, obvious, and non-innovative - but where were we (and Valve, Facebook, Apple, GoG, Microsoft, Walmart, etc...) during the 2008 public comment period?
No way - once we realize the bacterial version are self aware, we can start an eukaryote version that the single celled bacterial networks can have an arms race against!
[???]
Sell admission.
Profit!
I'd be interested in having the (cooled down) hot water lines in my house purged when I walk into the bathroom in the morning, or the kitchen preparing and cooking my dinner to be ready when my car tells it I'll be home. For that matter, I'd be interested in reading a book all the way home while my car navigated, accident free, through smoothly flowing optimized traffic. Waving at my computer to make 3-D spatial adjustments instead of using a planar pointer just sounds like a good idea.
It works both ways. Noticing this requires not being a moronic grammar nazi though.
Obligatory.
I used to be a scientist, but then I got hit by a quantum fruit fly arrow... ?
This was decided way back at the final interference testing. This is merely formalizing the failure of the business.