I have not seen this movie yet, but have heard it is very good. However, I think this movie is an exception not a rule. To begin with, Depp is phenomenal. His presence and skill can turn any movie into a wonderful experience.
That said, I do not see this movie as comparable to H2G2. The later has traditionally been, in all mediums, about words, emotions, and relationships. I believe the former was an action film with much CG. Too much action of CG will ruin H2G2. It would be like assumed Lucas could make a good period film.
We have always said every security system has a crack. We may not be able to think of it. We may not think the crack is cost effective, but the crack exists and will become feasable.
This is fuckin' briliant. A pure barter system. A product that has value but many are not willing to pay for. A small service that takes very little time but will create value.
At best a single study is a guess. At worst, it is an opinion. This is the case in every field. This is a fundamental reality. Even in the best studies, that do their best to use the hardest science possible and the scientific method and be as objective as humanly possible, a study is still a guess.
That is why the second step of any serious study is peer review and the third step is duplication by disinterested parties. Reality begins to form after many different comparable studies are done and synthesized into a consensus.
It is true that MS or anyone else can contract a study and tell the researchers to design tests that will tend towards a preset abstract. That is their prerogative. It doesn't really matter because critical thinkers will discount the results until such results are subject to the adversarial system of science.
The thing is that everything has a risk. It is not certain that using the maximum data we could have had at the time that there would have been a consensus on a catastrophic failure. Remember, most of the current pontification is luisurely wisdom that would have been difficult to gain during a mission when time is at a minimum. More than likely there would have been a chance of failure and a chance of success using a specific re entry pattern. Likewise, any plan to use a capsule from the space station would have a chance of failure and a chance of success.
The scariest scenario was to use another shuttle without proper preparation. Such a mission would have a significant chance of failure, and such a failure would involve the loss of additional life. Probably any crew would have willing to take that risk, but would NASA allow such a mission?
In the end, there is no way to know if anything would have been different. Would we have risked another set of lives on the off chance we can save everyone? If we managed to get the Columbia crew to a capsule and the capsule failed, wouldn't we still be having this second guessing conversation?
As has been pointed out, exploration is risky. If we are going into space more lives will be lost, perhaps without the neat resolutions we have been blessed with thus far.
I am not sure what the long run is. Over the past 100 years unions in United States has benifited the vast majority of people. The few people that did not benifit tended not to be hurt, at least as much as the worker.
The problem most people get into is putting the firm and worker on opposite sides of the good/evil spectrum. While many people are ideologically opposed to one or the other, it really makes no sense. I mean no one is really opposed to firms, just perhaps they facts that corporations have been given the same rights as humans. And no one really wants the people who make the products to be injured or killed or not feed thier family, but simply want to make sure that total costs of employment do not go too high.
Unions are just one way that workers have found to manage the labor market. Not allowing unions to exist would be like not allowing groups of fims to form marketing organizations. Would anyway say that the meat companies should be forbidden from advertising thier product through a mutually agreed third party?
Oft times the weekly has the best overviews of local events. The big locals can't really do an even job for fear of pissing off their friends. The nationals can't do it because they are too far away to really know the local insights. Once can piece all the reporting together and do your own compilation and analysis, but such overviews probably the best use of these weekly journalistic talent.
For instance, look at the Houston Press, a weekly rag, for the Enron Overview.
It hoses most all components. The stress of launch, the radiation, even the vacuum can be an issue. That is why they use really expensive harden components, which everyone then complains about. After all, why pay 1K for a component that is certified to work when you could go down to the office store and buy it for 50 bucks.
increased number of components means increased complexity. increased complexity means increased cost to maintain reliability. Cost increase much more than linearly. For non-humna missions, extra components not justified.
Using redundant low reliability components is the cheap office solution, not the space exploration solution.
I understand that these things take time. You have to fix the bug, go through developer testing, regression testing, and then build some full product for beta testing. The patch then has to be built for distribution. Except for the fix and the beta test, all of this should be automated.
But the question can be asked, why is this such an issue. Why is the %01(SOH) character so special? Is there any reason why they can't just go into the code that filters the URL input and strip out all control codes. Being excellent coders, there should be a single routine that does this, and stripping out control codes(%01-%1F) should not be a problem. These appear to be control codes in Unicode as well.
Unless they did something really stupid and are using these control codes for some nonstandard internal purpose. Which means that they have to slash and hack the code until it the bugs is fixed.
The RIAA sues unspecified users of certain IP addresses for exposes files who names are similiar to copyrighted materials and whose content may parially match said materials. They also sue sherman networke because thier product could be used to violate copyrights owned by the RIAA.
Sherman Networds sue the RIAA violating the EULA by connecting to their network using unathorized software. Sherman also sues the RIAA for actively limiting the ability to share any content, even those that the RIAA has no interest or that Sherman has copyright clearence.
I would say the RIAA has vague lawsuit. After all, the RIAA did commit certain acts, while Sherman merely provided a tool.
Certifications and degrees are almost always a first pass screening procedure, just like years of experience. It is more important for the new candidate than the existing employee.
Today, with the wide availability of CS majors, even CS master, will to work for starvation wages, there is little reason for a company to settle for anything less. Likewise, since some certificates take mere months to acquire, there are bound to be a surplus of persons with these certificates.
To refer back to the article, if a company uses the 'certificate' issue to block your promotion, then it is likely that they simply want you to stay where you are. If they really wanted you in the department, they would hire you on the condition that you earned your certification is a certain time. During that time they would also train you in company specific routine and requirements. I hate to say, but it sounds like the engineering department is just messing with you. Go work somewhere else if you can.
Also, perhaps you might try for more demanding certifications.
It is a reliability issue. A second CPU is nice for redundancy, but integrated that second CPU complicates circuity. As things get more complicated, it gets more expensive to maintain the same level of reliability. The increase in expense in not linear. And since the reliability of the CPU is high, it is probably unlikely to be worth the expense when human life is not at risk.
Most offices now have to have redundant computers because the reliability of the machines are so low. This make economic sense for the office. Space travel is not the office. With space travel you buy the highly reliable machines and test the hell out of them to make sure they work. Even with all that they don't always work. But when you are doing something new not everything works.
Unfortunately kids today think Newton made his formulations the instant he got hit i the head. Explorations is about hard work and risks. And some guy in an office who has never done it has no idea of how complex it is.
I agree that the 1000 to 1 ratio is literary hyperbole, but it points out a problem in any charitable donations. The problem is illustrated by recent IRS crackdowns on individuals taking inflated deductions when the donate their POS car.
In terms of MS, we have a donation of licenses and money. At a cynical level, this donation is a marketing scheme, and should be accounted for as such. Like any marketing scheme, full costs will be accounted, which must be offset by sales, tax write offs, and other benefits.
For instance, if they take full retail for the licenses, which tend to be 5X the minimum bulk street price, we can reasonable assume that wholesale costs are at least 10X cheaper than retail. We must also assume that MS is stating the full value of the cash donation. However, the cost to the company for such a donation will immediately be reduced by at least 30% due to tax savings,
This immediately might reduce the actual value of the donation to 300 million, assuming a 50/50 split. There are other factors to consider. The costs of the licensing might be negligible. The licenses themselves, mere entries in a database, aren't a large cash sink. Likewise, the cost and management of the distribution of the product might be outsourced to the UN.
And because this is an advertising campaign there will be other benefits. Some of the money will come back to MS and may increase revenues and profits, which could benefit the stock price. Exposing students to MS products is an important step to expanding MS market share. And, because MS seems willing to give away licenses to compete with Linux, this may just be a method to encourage the UN to be the global clearinghouse for MS products. In the end the deal may cost MS much less than a million.
No, you outsource to transfer risk. There is no reason to believe that OCZ did not just take the cheapest bidder, without doing any due dilegance, and then hope for the best. They probably made a great deal of money on the bottles they did sell, and will charge back all costs to the manufacturer on the bottles they did are recalling.
There is almost no risk in it for OCZ. Very few people are going to ask why OCZ did not due regular tests on samples bought in the open market. The obvious answer is they did not want to know.
It is a good analogy. Banks make thier money like the RIAA. They con some farmer into thinking that increase supply will not affect the price of a commodity, and therefore the farmer will have 100% of profits based on the current price to pay off loans for new equipment.
In both cases, the profits tend to be insufficient to pay off a loan.
SCO has been very good at only misleading congress. This has been shown to be quite acceptable. The cigarretes companies lies to congress, but it wasn't enough of a lie. Most presidents mislead congress, for example Regan/Bush on the Iran/Contra drug deals. It is unlikely the SCO lawyers would let something out that was actionable.
Mr. Garrison: Excuse me, what the hell are you doing?
Agent 1: It's alright, we're with the government.
Agent 2: We're just shutting you down.
Mr. Garrison: Shutting me down? Why?
Agent 3: The airlines are in desperate trouble. Your vehicle is causing them to lose money.
Mr. Garrison: Yeah, well that was the point, dingleberry! put that down!
Agent 4: Right, so the government is bailing the airlines out again, but shutting you down and making ITs illegal.
Mr. Garrison: OH, GOD-DAMNIT! You'd better be kidding!
Agent 5: Sir, many people work for the airlines. We can't let them all be fired.
Mr. Garrison: THE AIRLINE COMPANIES ARE LOSING MONEY BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN INCOMPETENCE AND THEIR OWN INEFFICIENCY!!
Agent 6: That may be true. But if you build, sell, or ride another IT, "it" will be the last time. Have a nice night.
It is unfortunate that some people have to work in such professions. But you can't really harangue people for complaining that what they thought would be a cush job occasionally turns out to be uncomfortable. Especailly since some, if not many of them, made a concious decision be in that profesion.
I mean, look at it this way. The people with the luck, skills, and fortitude, tend to be in the more cush jobs. They have often worked hard, and gave up many things, to be in a position to obtain the cush job. The people in cush jobs tend not to the ones that partied though high school, and skipped college for the money that a low-skill job would deliver. This is not always the case, as some just luck into a good job, and some people just have limited skills, but the point still stands.
And, if I may be so bold, why should we listen to a soldier complain, especially when he or she willingly applied to the service and dutifully collected the payments. It is not like it is a surprise that service men and women get shot at. It is not like it is a secret that the U.S. occasionally sends troops into action. It is true that recruiter will lie to get recruits, but is anybody, even a 16 year old, that gullible (I know the answer to this is yes, I have seen it). I mean really, how is coming to work in a fancy office building then getting a office that is not in compliance with US laws similar to being sent off to do your job? Yes the job is shitty, but is what you signed on to do. I know for many, these jobs, especially the military, is thier only hope. These kids are put in a difficult situation, and i feel for them, but at least they are getting three squares a day, some discipline, and hopefully a skill.
I really wish that people would not have to work in shitty jobs. I wish that every company in the US was forced to comply with OSHA rules, perhaps shoot the non compliant managers and replace them, repeat as necessary. I wish the insane leaders of the world would not treat god's children as cattle to be sacrificed as needed.
I reminded of this quote from Wilson when he declared war on the Axis powers Think what it was they were applauding. My message today was a message of death for our young men. How strange it seems to applaud that
Which simply gives consumers yet another reason to avoid the theatre all together. Why am I paying $10 and then have to sit through 5 minutes of blatant advertising. I have a big screen TV at home. I have surround sound. I can get a week rental for $4, and then loan to three of my friends. Total cost now is $1/family.
Of course, why I am i spending even $1 for a movie that I then have to sit through 5 minutes of stupid introductory limitations, warnings, and graphics. I can set my computer to download the movie, and watch it without the ads.
I've said it before and I'll again. Give the people what they want, and they will buy it. I had no problem paying $7 for a movie. I had not problem paying $15 for VHS. I had no problem paying $15 for a CD. Now that movies come with stupids ads, and DVDs have introduced annoyware to the movies, and CDs fund frivolous lawsuits, I am loathe to bring myself to purchase any of these.
Unfortunately, being stupid and being wrong aren't themselves crimes
I would really like to see a plea agreement in which the executive of the fraud ridden company publicly admits he or she is stupid and incompetent, perhaps taking an ad with a appropriately worded letter in the Times, Journal, Forbes and Money. In exchange for such an admission, there would be no trial, there would be no jail time, and no one money would be wasted.
I really believe that some of the cases over the past few years could be settled this way. I believe many executives do deserve jail time, but why waste the resources? The bottom line is that they are stupid and should be treated as such.
This is another example of setting arbitrary standards. Windows does not, has not, and probably never will put more thought into drivers. Over the past few years Windows drivers have become much more logical, but you still need a different driver for each version of windows.
The reason that hardware works on Windows is that it is worth the vendors time to tweak the hardware so it will work seamlessly with Windows. It is interesting to note in other OS, hardware has been had the ability to work seamlessly for years. For instance, I recall trying to install an Iomega drive in Windows back 5 or 6 years ago. On the other "toy" OS, it was plug and play. On Windows, one had to manually install drivers via the command line.
The reality is that people expect to have to fuss with Windows. They think it is the only thing out there, and for some it is, so hacking it for hours and paying hundreds of dollars for support is acceptable. Users do not want to go to the moster they do not know. I run a home Windows desktop. It doesn't work as well as it should. I run it because the person wants to run Windows because they can get all the software for basically nothing.
Really, the cell phone is just a continuation of other communication technology. I remember reading how bad even the telegraph was. People sending runners to your house at all hours of the night. The telephone was worse. A person could no longer leave work at work. With the telephone you could be disturbed at any time of the day or night, and it was so easy, that anyone who could afford it felt they had a right. I have heard some say that the telephone was a significant contributing factor to the end of doctors making house calls. The simple equation is that as communication becomes cheaper, the data transmitted becomes less information and more junk.
As far as the people who just say "turn it off", I have but one question. Do you turn off your phone at home? Do you value your family and friends enough to not answer the phone when they are present as guests in your house? Do you fight the social pressures to answer the phone? I do not worry about missing calls, and I deal with the social ridicule that results from my decision. I know that not everyone has the freedom to miss calls, and some just want to take the path of least resistance. Not mention that fact that some jobs will fire you if you are not available 24/7.
OTOH, there is a difference between the path of least resistance and purposefully antagonizing the people around you with silly ringtones and constant babbling. Therefore, my least favorite invention if the musical ringtone, and I can think of few punishments that would be too severe for their users. The constant babling, as I have said, is an inevitable result of the cheapness of the medium.
Slashdot Mirror
That said, I do not see this movie as comparable to H2G2. The later has traditionally been, in all mediums, about words, emotions, and relationships. I believe the former was an action film with much CG. Too much action of CG will ruin H2G2. It would be like assumed Lucas could make a good period film.
This is fuckin' briliant. A pure barter system. A product that has value but many are not willing to pay for. A small service that takes very little time but will create value.
That is why the second step of any serious study is peer review and the third step is duplication by disinterested parties. Reality begins to form after many different comparable studies are done and synthesized into a consensus.
It is true that MS or anyone else can contract a study and tell the researchers to design tests that will tend towards a preset abstract. That is their prerogative. It doesn't really matter because critical thinkers will discount the results until such results are subject to the adversarial system of science.
So, do you think telemarketers make more than 32K a year?
The scariest scenario was to use another shuttle without proper preparation. Such a mission would have a significant chance of failure, and such a failure would involve the loss of additional life. Probably any crew would have willing to take that risk, but would NASA allow such a mission?
In the end, there is no way to know if anything would have been different. Would we have risked another set of lives on the off chance we can save everyone? If we managed to get the Columbia crew to a capsule and the capsule failed, wouldn't we still be having this second guessing conversation?
As has been pointed out, exploration is risky. If we are going into space more lives will be lost, perhaps without the neat resolutions we have been blessed with thus far.
The problem most people get into is putting the firm and worker on opposite sides of the good/evil spectrum. While many people are ideologically opposed to one or the other, it really makes no sense. I mean no one is really opposed to firms, just perhaps they facts that corporations have been given the same rights as humans. And no one really wants the people who make the products to be injured or killed or not feed thier family, but simply want to make sure that total costs of employment do not go too high.
Unions are just one way that workers have found to manage the labor market. Not allowing unions to exist would be like not allowing groups of fims to form marketing organizations. Would anyway say that the meat companies should be forbidden from advertising thier product through a mutually agreed third party?
For instance, look at the Houston Press, a weekly rag, for the Enron Overview.
It hoses most all components. The stress of launch, the radiation, even the vacuum can be an issue. That is why they use really expensive harden components, which everyone then complains about. After all, why pay 1K for a component that is certified to work when you could go down to the office store and buy it for 50 bucks.
Using redundant low reliability components is the cheap office solution, not the space exploration solution.
But the question can be asked, why is this such an issue. Why is the %01(SOH) character so special? Is there any reason why they can't just go into the code that filters the URL input and strip out all control codes. Being excellent coders, there should be a single routine that does this, and stripping out control codes(%01-%1F) should not be a problem. These appear to be control codes in Unicode as well.
Unless they did something really stupid and are using these control codes for some nonstandard internal purpose. Which means that they have to slash and hack the code until it the bugs is fixed.
Sherman Networds sue the RIAA violating the EULA by connecting to their network using unathorized software. Sherman also sues the RIAA for actively limiting the ability to share any content, even those that the RIAA has no interest or that Sherman has copyright clearence.
I would say the RIAA has vague lawsuit. After all, the RIAA did commit certain acts, while Sherman merely provided a tool.
Today, with the wide availability of CS majors, even CS master, will to work for starvation wages, there is little reason for a company to settle for anything less. Likewise, since some certificates take mere months to acquire, there are bound to be a surplus of persons with these certificates.
To refer back to the article, if a company uses the 'certificate' issue to block your promotion, then it is likely that they simply want you to stay where you are. If they really wanted you in the department, they would hire you on the condition that you earned your certification is a certain time. During that time they would also train you in company specific routine and requirements. I hate to say, but it sounds like the engineering department is just messing with you. Go work somewhere else if you can.
Also, perhaps you might try for more demanding certifications.
Most offices now have to have redundant computers because the reliability of the machines are so low. This make economic sense for the office. Space travel is not the office. With space travel you buy the highly reliable machines and test the hell out of them to make sure they work. Even with all that they don't always work. But when you are doing something new not everything works.
Unfortunately kids today think Newton made his formulations the instant he got hit i the head. Explorations is about hard work and risks. And some guy in an office who has never done it has no idea of how complex it is.
In terms of MS, we have a donation of licenses and money. At a cynical level, this donation is a marketing scheme, and should be accounted for as such. Like any marketing scheme, full costs will be accounted, which must be offset by sales, tax write offs, and other benefits.
For instance, if they take full retail for the licenses, which tend to be 5X the minimum bulk street price, we can reasonable assume that wholesale costs are at least 10X cheaper than retail. We must also assume that MS is stating the full value of the cash donation. However, the cost to the company for such a donation will immediately be reduced by at least 30% due to tax savings,
This immediately might reduce the actual value of the donation to 300 million, assuming a 50/50 split. There are other factors to consider. The costs of the licensing might be negligible. The licenses themselves, mere entries in a database, aren't a large cash sink. Likewise, the cost and management of the distribution of the product might be outsourced to the UN.
And because this is an advertising campaign there will be other benefits. Some of the money will come back to MS and may increase revenues and profits, which could benefit the stock price. Exposing students to MS products is an important step to expanding MS market share. And, because MS seems willing to give away licenses to compete with Linux, this may just be a method to encourage the UN to be the global clearinghouse for MS products. In the end the deal may cost MS much less than a million.
There is almost no risk in it for OCZ. Very few people are going to ask why OCZ did not due regular tests on samples bought in the open market. The obvious answer is they did not want to know.
In both cases, the profits tend to be insufficient to pay off a loan.
Nothing more need be said about the SCO situation.
SCO has been very good at only misleading congress. This has been shown to be quite acceptable. The cigarretes companies lies to congress, but it wasn't enough of a lie. Most presidents mislead congress, for example Regan/Bush on the Iran/Contra drug deals. It is unlikely the SCO lawyers would let something out that was actionable.
Payment to Novel: 95 billion
Payment to McBride: 20 billion
Payment to SCO: -15 billion
Mr. Garrison: Excuse me, what the hell are you doing?
Agent 1: It's alright, we're with the government.
Agent 2: We're just shutting you down.
Mr. Garrison: Shutting me down? Why?
Agent 3: The airlines are in desperate trouble. Your vehicle is causing them to lose money.
Mr. Garrison: Yeah, well that was the point, dingleberry! put that down!
Agent 4: Right, so the government is bailing the airlines out again, but shutting you down and making ITs illegal.
Mr. Garrison: OH, GOD-DAMNIT! You'd better be kidding!
Agent 5: Sir, many people work for the airlines. We can't let them all be fired.
Mr. Garrison: THE AIRLINE COMPANIES ARE LOSING MONEY BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN INCOMPETENCE AND THEIR OWN INEFFICIENCY!!
Agent 6: That may be true. But if you build, sell, or ride another IT, "it" will be the last time. Have a nice night.
I mean, look at it this way. The people with the luck, skills, and fortitude, tend to be in the more cush jobs. They have often worked hard, and gave up many things, to be in a position to obtain the cush job. The people in cush jobs tend not to the ones that partied though high school, and skipped college for the money that a low-skill job would deliver. This is not always the case, as some just luck into a good job, and some people just have limited skills, but the point still stands.
And, if I may be so bold, why should we listen to a soldier complain, especially when he or she willingly applied to the service and dutifully collected the payments. It is not like it is a surprise that service men and women get shot at. It is not like it is a secret that the U.S. occasionally sends troops into action. It is true that recruiter will lie to get recruits, but is anybody, even a 16 year old, that gullible (I know the answer to this is yes, I have seen it). I mean really, how is coming to work in a fancy office building then getting a office that is not in compliance with US laws similar to being sent off to do your job? Yes the job is shitty, but is what you signed on to do. I know for many, these jobs, especially the military, is thier only hope. These kids are put in a difficult situation, and i feel for them, but at least they are getting three squares a day, some discipline, and hopefully a skill.
I really wish that people would not have to work in shitty jobs. I wish that every company in the US was forced to comply with OSHA rules, perhaps shoot the non compliant managers and replace them, repeat as necessary. I wish the insane leaders of the world would not treat god's children as cattle to be sacrificed as needed.
I reminded of this quote from Wilson when he declared war on the Axis powers
Think what it was they were applauding. My message today was a message of death for our young men. How strange it seems to applaud that
Of course, why I am i spending even $1 for a movie that I then have to sit through 5 minutes of stupid introductory limitations, warnings, and graphics. I can set my computer to download the movie, and watch it without the ads.
I've said it before and I'll again. Give the people what they want, and they will buy it. I had no problem paying $7 for a movie. I had not problem paying $15 for VHS. I had no problem paying $15 for a CD. Now that movies come with stupids ads, and DVDs have introduced annoyware to the movies, and CDs fund frivolous lawsuits, I am loathe to bring myself to purchase any of these.
I would really like to see a plea agreement in which the executive of the fraud ridden company publicly admits he or she is stupid and incompetent, perhaps taking an ad with a appropriately worded letter in the Times, Journal, Forbes and Money. In exchange for such an admission, there would be no trial, there would be no jail time, and no one money would be wasted.
I really believe that some of the cases over the past few years could be settled this way. I believe many executives do deserve jail time, but why waste the resources? The bottom line is that they are stupid and should be treated as such.
The reason that hardware works on Windows is that it is worth the vendors time to tweak the hardware so it will work seamlessly with Windows. It is interesting to note in other OS, hardware has been had the ability to work seamlessly for years. For instance, I recall trying to install an Iomega drive in Windows back 5 or 6 years ago. On the other "toy" OS, it was plug and play. On Windows, one had to manually install drivers via the command line.
The reality is that people expect to have to fuss with Windows. They think it is the only thing out there, and for some it is, so hacking it for hours and paying hundreds of dollars for support is acceptable. Users do not want to go to the moster they do not know. I run a home Windows desktop. It doesn't work as well as it should. I run it because the person wants to run Windows because they can get all the software for basically nothing.
Really, the cell phone is just a continuation of other communication technology. I remember reading how bad even the telegraph was. People sending runners to your house at all hours of the night. The telephone was worse. A person could no longer leave work at work. With the telephone you could be disturbed at any time of the day or night, and it was so easy, that anyone who could afford it felt they had a right. I have heard some say that the telephone was a significant contributing factor to the end of doctors making house calls. The simple equation is that as communication becomes cheaper, the data transmitted becomes less information and more junk.
As far as the people who just say "turn it off", I have but one question. Do you turn off your phone at home? Do you value your family and friends enough to not answer the phone when they are present as guests in your house? Do you fight the social pressures to answer the phone? I do not worry about missing calls, and I deal with the social ridicule that results from my decision. I know that not everyone has the freedom to miss calls, and some just want to take the path of least resistance. Not mention that fact that some jobs will fire you if you are not available 24/7.
OTOH, there is a difference between the path of least resistance and purposefully antagonizing the people around you with silly ringtones and constant babbling. Therefore, my least favorite invention if the musical ringtone, and I can think of few punishments that would be too severe for their users. The constant babling, as I have said, is an inevitable result of the cheapness of the medium.