I don't get this deal. A brand new TivoHD costs about $200 as well (okay, $300 retail, but you can find it for less. woot.com had them for $180 at one point).
And that's a dual tuner box, 180 hours (30 HD hours), fast, easy, no maintenance, works over the internet, gets all of Tivo's features, everything. It does digital cable perfectly with a CableCard from the cable company (and all cable companies offer them now). It just works.
So... what the heck is the point of this package, exactly? It's as expensive as the TivoHD box is, it does less than the box does, it makes you provide your own computer, and MythTV is probably better than it anyway.
You think that's neat... This was back several years before XP came out, but I once found a 700 MB image for a CD that had installations for like 15 different versions of Windows, from 95 to 98 to NT4, all on the same disc. Including all the Pro and Server and other versions and everything else.
Basically somebody had sat down and ran a big comparison on all these to find the shared files, then engineered a disc to have all these different partitions own that shared data, allowing for installation of any of them. Then they went a step further and wrote a boot sector to let you boot any of those partitions via a simple text choice at boot time. The result was a single disc that could install any version of Windows that was available at the time.
Had that disc for years, came in extremely handy.
Re:What the problem with Gmail?
on
Good Email For Kids?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Which is another reason not to use GMail for this. You cannot auto delete anything in GMail, only send it to the trash.
Anyone out there know of (an)other service(s) that satisfy all the OP's needs *and* deliver a, in your opinion, better-than-Gmail/Google Apps webmail interface?
Your question assumes that there is a better interface for webmail than GMail. After searching around, I've never found a better one. GMail just works so well for managing large amounts of email that I'm hard pressed to think of a better way to do it.
Those terms are REQUIRED for Google to be able to display your content.
Let's examine them carefully, eh? "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display."
So, what exactly are we giving Google here?
Basically, it's a license to display the content. Hey, they sorta need that if I'm uploading photos for the purpose of them actually displaying it on the internet.
They have a "perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license". Meaning that they can display those pictures without paying me for them, worldwide, forever. Okay, the irrevocable part sucks, because if I take the content offline, I'd like it to be actually taken offline, but that's a minor legal thing that's probably there because they can't guarantee that what with their caching schemes and such.
They can "reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute". Reproduction is required in order to publish/perform/display/distribute the photos. Adapt, modify, translate applies to resizing, cropping, that sort of thing.
This is a non-story, people. They are not taking the copyright away, they are asking for the legal ability to do *what you want them to actually do*. Which is basically to host your content.
If you've been paying attention, you'd know that the commercial was not about software.
And by applaud, understand that I mean "clapped while laughing out loud". It's not like they stood up and clapped while saying "bravo, good chap" or anything like that.
If the thought doesn't fit, then your head is in the wrong shape.
Well, the only thing I can think of to say to that is to ask what sort of crap bars do you go to?
The bar in question had about 30 people in it, and I personally know perhaps 80% of them by name. A local neighborhood bar, in other words.
I guess I can understand this sort of thing if you live in the suburbs, go to bars alone or with small groups, and don't talk to anybody else at all while there, but in the more urban neighborhood environments, the local bar (or "pub" if you prefer) is a gathering place for the entire neighborhood. It's not at all unusual to have cheering during the game or to laugh loudly or to make any sort of noises.
There's nothing surreal about it, it's a party. That's kind of the whole point of going to a bar.
I first saw it in a bar, last night, during a football game. The entire bar went quiet to watch it, laughed at the right spots, everyone laughed out loud at the end, and some applauded.
Sorry, but you're simply wrong, as is the original article. That ad was absolutely effective. It worked on every level.
Yes, it is indeed Unbox. All they did was to make streaming copies of all their content available.
Once you begin streaming anything, click the link up top that says "Your Video Library" and you'll find the streaming video you just watched added to your list. From there you can download it or send it to your Tivo, with a somewhat nicer interface than previously.
I do wish that you didn't have to start streaming the videos first though to make the purchase work. A simple selection of "stream" or "download" or "send to Tivo" would be nice to see *before* it tries to rape my bandwidth with the streaming video.
You can still download these streaming videos as well, in what appears to be the original unaltered quality. Just go to http://www.amazon.com/gp/video/streaming/ and access your video library there after you start any of the streaming videos. Can even send them to your Tivo if you want.
It's the perpetual and irrevocable part. Imagine if Facebook would keep everything you deleted and then after you closed your account, post it all back online, write a book called "Facebook's Top 10 Stupid Users", and highlight unflattering pictures of you on their homepage. That's all within the scope of you granting a "royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed".
By making it perpetual and irrevocable, you don't have the problem of people coming up to you all the time and saying "your site sucks because of recent change X! I want you to delete my comments now and blah blah blah...".
Almost no forum makes it easy to delete submissions. If you delete things willy-nilly like that, then your archives lose thread continuity and don't make much sense when people later decide to get bitchy. You need to make submissions irrevocable so that a) you can later tell those sorts of people to go F themselves and b) to maintain the continuity of your content. Because it is on your site and it is your content, even if you don't own the actual copyright to that content. You need to be able to display that content however you see fit, to retain control.
That's not draconian at all. Most sites that accept and display user-submitted content have something similar. They have to, because they are displaying that content. All of those rights are required to be able to display somebody else's content.
There's nothing wrong with webapps, but it makes little sense to write all your application logic into the client-side application itself, where it can be messed with and is untrustworthy.
All you control is the server. Your application logic needs to be there, under your control. The client side should be nothing but the "view" in this MVC model.
Also, WoW is a whole different kettle of fish. It's basically a graphical interface with some smart predictive logic. All the actual stuff really happening happens on the server-side. The client is still just the view.
Why is that more insane than a desktop app which ties into an online database?
I didn't say that it was... because they're both equally insane.
You can't trust the client. So why put all your application logic on there?
(Note that I'm not talking about a separate application with actual functionality that is useful with or without the data from the server, as that's fine. But a "webapp" implicitly means that without the server-side, the app is mostly useless...)
True, and I agree, but have you seen what crazy people are doing these days?
Take a real hard look at SproutCore. The basic concept is to write code in a Ruby-like template lanaguage which, when compiled/built generates a bunch of HTML. Then you write the actual application logic using Javascript. The back-end server piece is relegated to little more than a way to pull stuff out of and insert changes into a database (along with a thin security layer to prevent people from doing bad things).
The whole REST model more or less relies on a "thick" client doing all the logic. And these crazy people are doing all that with Javascript, basically. Which is fine from a pretty aspect, but verges on insanity for any sort of serious application.
Sorry, suso, but those guards were right and you were wrong.
You have the right to take photos of anything you want while standing on public property. But when you're standing on private property, even one that is freely accessible to the public, you must obey the stated rules laid down by the owner of that property.
So, if they say no photos, and you take a photo, then you are indeed guilty of trespassing. They can call the cops on you, have you arrested, and you will then pay a fine or go to jail.
Property rights are strong ones. You do not have the right to photograph from private property without permission. Period.
Don't stand on your rights when you don't have any, because it makes other photographers look like assholes.
Not only was the summary bad, TFA was bad as well. Why couldn't a conventional dialysis machine be used? It doesn't say.
Is there a doctor in the house?
Probably not enough blood in the patient.
Using a dialysis machine means taking a fair amount of blood out of the body, running it through a bunch of tubes, and putting it back.
This effectively adds a lot of extra volume to the blood system as a whole. Adults can spare some without effect, but children and babies are much smaller, and so you have to have a much smaller device which doesn't have as much volume in it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get this deal. A brand new TivoHD costs about $200 as well (okay, $300 retail, but you can find it for less. woot.com had them for $180 at one point).
And that's a dual tuner box, 180 hours (30 HD hours), fast, easy, no maintenance, works over the internet, gets all of Tivo's features, everything. It does digital cable perfectly with a CableCard from the cable company (and all cable companies offer them now). It just works.
So... what the heck is the point of this package, exactly? It's as expensive as the TivoHD box is, it does less than the box does, it makes you provide your own computer, and MythTV is probably better than it anyway.
Has Nero finally gone completely insane?
You think that's neat... This was back several years before XP came out, but I once found a 700 MB image for a CD that had installations for like 15 different versions of Windows, from 95 to 98 to NT4, all on the same disc. Including all the Pro and Server and other versions and everything else.
Basically somebody had sat down and ran a big comparison on all these to find the shared files, then engineered a disc to have all these different partitions own that shared data, allowing for installation of any of them. Then they went a step further and wrote a boot sector to let you boot any of those partitions via a simple text choice at boot time. The result was a single disc that could install any version of Windows that was available at the time.
Had that disc for years, came in extremely handy.
Which is another reason not to use GMail for this. You cannot auto delete anything in GMail, only send it to the trash.
He specifically asked for a commercial provider. Running your own email server is easy, but requires a good always on connection.
DIY is not always the best way to do it.
Anyone out there know of (an)other service(s) that satisfy all the OP's needs *and* deliver a, in your opinion, better-than-Gmail/Google Apps webmail interface?
Your question assumes that there is a better interface for webmail than GMail. After searching around, I've never found a better one. GMail just works so well for managing large amounts of email that I'm hard pressed to think of a better way to do it.
I wish I could mod you above 5 points.
Those terms are REQUIRED for Google to be able to display your content.
Let's examine them carefully, eh?
"By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display."
So, what exactly are we giving Google here?
Basically, it's a license to display the content. Hey, they sorta need that if I'm uploading photos for the purpose of them actually displaying it on the internet.
They have a "perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license". Meaning that they can display those pictures without paying me for them, worldwide, forever. Okay, the irrevocable part sucks, because if I take the content offline, I'd like it to be actually taken offline, but that's a minor legal thing that's probably there because they can't guarantee that what with their caching schemes and such.
They can "reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute". Reproduction is required in order to publish/perform/display/distribute the photos. Adapt, modify, translate applies to resizing, cropping, that sort of thing.
This is a non-story, people. They are not taking the copyright away, they are asking for the legal ability to do *what you want them to actually do*. Which is basically to host your content.
If you've been paying attention, you'd know that the commercial was not about software.
And by applaud, understand that I mean "clapped while laughing out loud". It's not like they stood up and clapped while saying "bravo, good chap" or anything like that.
If the thought doesn't fit, then your head is in the wrong shape.
Hardly. It's the kind of place where you can write on the bar with Sharpies, and which serves Old Style in cans during Cubs games and PBR on draft.
Don't make stupid assumptions in the future. It's possible for somebody to disagree with you and still not be wrong.
Well, the only thing I can think of to say to that is to ask what sort of crap bars do you go to?
The bar in question had about 30 people in it, and I personally know perhaps 80% of them by name. A local neighborhood bar, in other words.
I guess I can understand this sort of thing if you live in the suburbs, go to bars alone or with small groups, and don't talk to anybody else at all while there, but in the more urban neighborhood environments, the local bar (or "pub" if you prefer) is a gathering place for the entire neighborhood. It's not at all unusual to have cheering during the game or to laugh loudly or to make any sort of noises.
There's nothing surreal about it, it's a party. That's kind of the whole point of going to a bar.
And that's basically what they do. It's a challenge-response mechanism. See here: http://www.verayo.com/solutions.html
So naturally it's unclonable in the trivial sense, but of course it may be vulnerable to a cryptographic attack.
What gets me though is that challenge/response mechanisms have been in RFID devices for ages. What's new about this one?
Note that they claim "Unlimited number of challenge response pairs for each chip" which just sounds freakin' strange to me.
Yes, in point of fact, they did. And I've seen it several times since then and everybody I've met likes it and thinks it's funny.
Not everybody is a technogeek, you know.
I first saw it in a bar, last night, during a football game. The entire bar went quiet to watch it, laughed at the right spots, everyone laughed out loud at the end, and some applauded.
Sorry, but you're simply wrong, as is the original article. That ad was absolutely effective. It worked on every level.
Cope.
Yes, it is indeed Unbox. All they did was to make streaming copies of all their content available.
Once you begin streaming anything, click the link up top that says "Your Video Library" and you'll find the streaming video you just watched added to your list. From there you can download it or send it to your Tivo, with a somewhat nicer interface than previously.
I do wish that you didn't have to start streaming the videos first though to make the purchase work. A simple selection of "stream" or "download" or "send to Tivo" would be nice to see *before* it tries to rape my bandwidth with the streaming video.
You can still download these streaming videos as well, in what appears to be the original unaltered quality. Just go to http://www.amazon.com/gp/video/streaming/ and access your video library there after you start any of the streaming videos. Can even send them to your Tivo if you want.
It's the perpetual and irrevocable part. Imagine if Facebook would keep everything you deleted and then after you closed your account, post it all back online, write a book called "Facebook's Top 10 Stupid Users", and highlight unflattering pictures of you on their homepage. That's all within the scope of you granting a "royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed".
By making it perpetual and irrevocable, you don't have the problem of people coming up to you all the time and saying "your site sucks because of recent change X! I want you to delete my comments now and blah blah blah...".
Almost no forum makes it easy to delete submissions. If you delete things willy-nilly like that, then your archives lose thread continuity and don't make much sense when people later decide to get bitchy. You need to make submissions irrevocable so that a) you can later tell those sorts of people to go F themselves and b) to maintain the continuity of your content. Because it is on your site and it is your content, even if you don't own the actual copyright to that content. You need to be able to display that content however you see fit, to retain control.
That's not draconian at all. Most sites that accept and display user-submitted content have something similar. They have to, because they are displaying that content. All of those rights are required to be able to display somebody else's content.
There's nothing wrong with webapps, but it makes little sense to write all your application logic into the client-side application itself, where it can be messed with and is untrustworthy.
All you control is the server. Your application logic needs to be there, under your control. The client side should be nothing but the "view" in this MVC model.
Also, WoW is a whole different kettle of fish. It's basically a graphical interface with some smart predictive logic. All the actual stuff really happening happens on the server-side. The client is still just the view.
Learn to read better. I never said REST had anything to do with javascript.
Why is that more insane than a desktop app which ties into an online database?
I didn't say that it was... because they're both equally insane.
You can't trust the client. So why put all your application logic on there?
(Note that I'm not talking about a separate application with actual functionality that is useful with or without the data from the server, as that's fine. But a "webapp" implicitly means that without the server-side, the app is mostly useless...)
True, and I agree, but have you seen what crazy people are doing these days?
Take a real hard look at SproutCore. The basic concept is to write code in a Ruby-like template lanaguage which, when compiled/built generates a bunch of HTML. Then you write the actual application logic using Javascript. The back-end server piece is relegated to little more than a way to pull stuff out of and insert changes into a database (along with a thin security layer to prevent people from doing bad things).
The whole REST model more or less relies on a "thick" client doing all the logic. And these crazy people are doing all that with Javascript, basically. Which is fine from a pretty aspect, but verges on insanity for any sort of serious application.
Sorry, suso, but those guards were right and you were wrong.
You have the right to take photos of anything you want while standing on public property. But when you're standing on private property, even one that is freely accessible to the public, you must obey the stated rules laid down by the owner of that property.
So, if they say no photos, and you take a photo, then you are indeed guilty of trespassing. They can call the cops on you, have you arrested, and you will then pay a fine or go to jail.
Property rights are strong ones. You do not have the right to photograph from private property without permission. Period.
Don't stand on your rights when you don't have any, because it makes other photographers look like assholes.
Not only was the summary bad, TFA was bad as well. Why couldn't a conventional dialysis machine be used? It doesn't say.
Is there a doctor in the house?
Probably not enough blood in the patient.
Using a dialysis machine means taking a fair amount of blood out of the body, running it through a bunch of tubes, and putting it back.
This effectively adds a lot of extra volume to the blood system as a whole. Adults can spare some without effect, but children and babies are much smaller, and so you have to have a much smaller device which doesn't have as much volume in it.
If my boss didn't want me to go out drinking, then I'd find a new boss.
Yes, dd-wrt has iptables built into it. Stick this into your iptables rules on the config page:
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport YOUR_BITTORRENT_PORT_NUMBER_HERE --tcp-flags RST RST -j DROP
Total agreement. Nothing is as good as vacuum made coffee.