Those icons obviously rotate the image 180 degrees. They depict the X/Y axes, and which direction the positive values go. So the first has X and Y increasing as you go to the lower-right, the second as you go to the upper-left.
The refresh rate on current models will really limit this. Might be ok for crossword puzzles and sudoku.
Well obviously they need to put a faster screen in these things! All my other portable devices can play games (and make phone calls), so why can't the Kindle? What's the point if it's not like all the other devices?
i hereby nominate apple speculation as the most boring internet subculture
But you see, that's the genius! I predict that Apple is harnessing the Internet to design the tablet for them. By putting small hints out, they can direct the flow of ideas. Once everyone's satisfied with the speculated design, they start manufacturing it (with a few changes to surprise people).
But even for this why would you want to build a big heavy satellite with huge solar panels? Just build a satellite that picks up power from a base station and beams it back down. Simpler, cheaper and more reliable.
Wait, you're suggesting that it's simpler to generate the power on Earth, beam it up to a satellite, then beam it back down to Earth? How are you going to have a small satellite that picks up this beamed power without losing alignment?
With normal insurance that's not hampered by government regulation, a person pays into a pool and is guaranteed to have unexpected costly care covered. The amount he pays each month is based on the risk each member of the pool poses. Each member IS paying for the benefit he receives.
When you prevent accurate determination of risk, you force sub-optimal pooling. You get high-risk people in a pool that contains many low-risk people, such that the low-risk people pay for risks they don't bring.
But the newspapers can opt out of being listed on Google. It seems you're saying that nobody should be allowed to summarize what is in another newspaper without prior permission. "Well, there is the New York times, that publishes stories about...er, things happening. I can't tell you any more; you'll have to buy and read it."
Your supermarket analogy is flawed because it involves something of limited quantity, and the supermarket's own property. Here, the "property" is viewers, something neither the newspapers nor Google own.
Yes, that sounds good in theory. But, wait til YOU find that you have a pre-existing condition. DNA profiling promises to give the insurance companies plenty of ammunition in that field.
So you're saying I should be able to make others pay for my health care?
Yes, people are different. And, the insurance companies want to know which differences are most profitable for them, so that they can drop everyone else.
No, insurance companies would like to assign people to like risk pools, and charge accordingly. Anything which allows them to put me in a different pool than some idiot who takes lots of risks is fine by me. Why should I have to subsidize others?
Though Google is driving some traffic to newspapers, it's also taking a significant share away
Newspapers don't own traffic, so nothing is being taken. Google is providing a competing product that half of users prefer to that the newspaper provides. Newspapers can easily provide a robots.txt which instructs Google to remove them from their news pages, if they think they would be better off that way.
So if I have two lights one mile apart, turn the first on, then the second a split second later, the edge of the "object" has traveled faster than light? If you've got the perception of a stable object even though it's really just the flashes of light of billions of new photons each second, it's not an object in a physical sense. You could send one photon one direction, and another in the other, and if one hits a split second before the other, the object didn't suddenly move that great distance.
I think more airport profiling is a good thing. Remember the utterly broken baggage handling system at the Denver airport? Profiling would have caught this earlier. Or the airport that always seems to have a trick up its sleeve? Again, profiling would have caught this airport before it even was allowed to put down its runways. Sure, airport profiling might result in some racial profiling, like whether it was made by this or that construction company, but this can be managed.
It just depends on what their target is. If it's "put atom within this circle", then 100% accuracy is putting all atoms within the circle. This says nothing of the size of the circle.
Note they said accuracy, not precision. This just means that it moves them to the area specified, not that it moves them all to the same physical point in space.
I'm a bit confused by your post. Are you saying that this T-Mobile plan can be as low as $0.10 per minute, regardless of how the phone is connecting (cell tower or WiFi)? Why would it cost the same even if connecting over WiFi, and why would even being able to use WiFi be an advantage? (I've never had a cellphone so this is interesting)
Your highway analogy is flawed in that it involves actual stolen goods, as in things removed from some location and transferred elsewhere, unlike the RIAA's case. This only makes your example even stronger; even where actual stolen goods are being transferred, there isn't precedent for this.
The RIAA guys need to get a real business model, because their artificial scarcity one requires way too many things to prop it up, and apparently quite expensive as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Those icons obviously rotate the image 180 degrees. They depict the X/Y axes, and which direction the positive values go. So the first has X and Y increasing as you go to the lower-right, the second as you go to the upper-left.
Amen. Remember, these people are getting paid for their labor, not paid a million times over, every time a copy of the code is distributed.
Well obviously they need to put a faster screen in these things! All my other portable devices can play games (and make phone calls), so why can't the Kindle? What's the point if it's not like all the other devices?
You must be new here. Nobody reads TFA, not even the person writing the summary! They all just read the summary.
But you see, that's the genius! I predict that Apple is harnessing the Internet to design the tablet for them. By putting small hints out, they can direct the flow of ideas. Once everyone's satisfied with the speculated design, they start manufacturing it (with a few changes to surprise people).
Wait, you're suggesting that it's simpler to generate the power on Earth, beam it up to a satellite, then beam it back down to Earth? How are you going to have a small satellite that picks up this beamed power without losing alignment?
With normal insurance that's not hampered by government regulation, a person pays into a pool and is guaranteed to have unexpected costly care covered. The amount he pays each month is based on the risk each member of the pool poses. Each member IS paying for the benefit he receives.
When you prevent accurate determination of risk, you force sub-optimal pooling. You get high-risk people in a pool that contains many low-risk people, such that the low-risk people pay for risks they don't bring.
But the newspapers can opt out of being listed on Google. It seems you're saying that nobody should be allowed to summarize what is in another newspaper without prior permission. "Well, there is the New York times, that publishes stories about...er, things happening. I can't tell you any more; you'll have to buy and read it."
Your supermarket analogy is flawed because it involves something of limited quantity, and the supermarket's own property. Here, the "property" is viewers, something neither the newspapers nor Google own.
So you're saying I should be able to make others pay for my health care?
Either "cut the amount of vulnerability in half" or "cut the number of vulnerabilities in half". Avoid count noun mismatch.
No, insurance companies would like to assign people to like risk pools, and charge accordingly. Anything which allows them to put me in a different pool than some idiot who takes lots of risks is fine by me. Why should I have to subsidize others?
Newspapers don't own traffic, so nothing is being taken. Google is providing a competing product that half of users prefer to that the newspaper provides. Newspapers can easily provide a robots.txt which instructs Google to remove them from their news pages, if they think they would be better off that way.
Sounds like the game simulated glitches in The Matrix perfectly, and you weren't "the one" and thus couldn't work around those obstacles.
So if I have two lights one mile apart, turn the first on, then the second a split second later, the edge of the "object" has traveled faster than light? If you've got the perception of a stable object even though it's really just the flashes of light of billions of new photons each second, it's not an object in a physical sense. You could send one photon one direction, and another in the other, and if one hits a split second before the other, the object didn't suddenly move that great distance.
They are hosting Bing's IP data on their Danger servers, which naturally lose data about that often.
I think more airport profiling is a good thing. Remember the utterly broken baggage handling system at the Denver airport? Profiling would have caught this earlier. Or the airport that always seems to have a trick up its sleeve? Again, profiling would have caught this airport before it even was allowed to put down its runways. Sure, airport profiling might result in some racial profiling, like whether it was made by this or that construction company, but this can be managed.
Never mind the fact that unlike every other currency, precious metals (gold and silver) have held their value for centuries.
Maybe they could rename it to Kalahari and tell users it's a new Reac.. a new OS.
It just depends on what their target is. If it's "put atom within this circle", then 100% accuracy is putting all atoms within the circle. This says nothing of the size of the circle.
Note they said accuracy, not precision. This just means that it moves them to the area specified, not that it moves them all to the same physical point in space.
Thanks for your clarification. Definitely sounds like the way to go if ever I get a cellphone.
I'm a bit confused by your post. Are you saying that this T-Mobile plan can be as low as $0.10 per minute, regardless of how the phone is connecting (cell tower or WiFi)? Why would it cost the same even if connecting over WiFi, and why would even being able to use WiFi be an advantage? (I've never had a cellphone so this is interesting)
I was also too lazy to find it, so I just searched for "XKCD comic with the butterflies". What do you know, first hit.
Is that like having a speedometer for your speedometer, to see how fast your speed is?
Your highway analogy is flawed in that it involves actual stolen goods, as in things removed from some location and transferred elsewhere, unlike the RIAA's case. This only makes your example even stronger; even where actual stolen goods are being transferred, there isn't precedent for this.
The RIAA guys need to get a real business model, because their artificial scarcity one requires way too many things to prop it up, and apparently quite expensive as well.