Well done Samsung, I applaud you for improving youir device in this way. Ever since Apple introduced local search my iPhone has been running like a dog. I go to type in a location in the map app and it takes literally 10 seconds for each letter to be typed into the search box. When I search (properly) online with Google for this problem it turns out that the local search kills older iPhones and many people who upgraded to the version of the OS with local search regret upgrading. Leave local search out it's mostly a waste of CPU cycles.
The screen cracked on my 3GS as well and I got it replaced because luckily I took out the insurance when I bought it. Also, once the 18 months initial contract ran out I got a PAYG SIM, so now I pay 10 per month instead of 35. I plan to never upgrade. My phone does what I need it to.
That all sounds very expensive and time consuming for both users and ISPs, and in many cases, probably unnecessary. How about this: if someone commits a crime the police investigate, the courts prosecute, and fines are paid/jailtime is done?
I guess the problem is that the leaders of the scientific publishing industry went to the same schools, and now go to the same dinner parties, as the people who allocate the science budget.
I wrote to the minister responsible about this, pointing out that if funding is predicated on high-impact publications, but the government wants open publications, then wouldn't it be better to predicate funding on openness. I received a response from the 'BIS Ministerial Correspondence Unit' containing this information:
"It may be helpful if I explain that an underpinning principle of the REF, as with the Research Assessment Exercise before it, is that all types of research and all forms of research output across all disciplines shall be assessed on a fair and equal basis. The REF Panels will not make use of journal impact factors, rankings or lists, or the perceived standing of the publisher, in assessing the quality of research outputs submitted. Hence whether the research output has been published in an open access journal, in a 'traditional' journal, or not in a journal at all, will not affect the assessment of its quality in the REF.
You might like to be aware of the "Panel criteria and working methods" document which sets out how the REF panels will assess submissions. This is available on the link below:
http://www.ref.ac.uk/pubs/2012-01/
I hope that this response addresses the issues you have raised."
As you can see, it did not address my concerns, it just pointed to an obscure paragraph buried somewhere that says impact factors are not taken into account in the REF, which from what I understand is the exact opposite of the truth.
The 'feature' is probably that the government will be paying their mates in the content industry (publishers) to ensure that they facilitate open access. Where does the money come from for this? The science budget of course.
I don't think McDonalds employees usually assault their customers and try to steal their belongings. Unless you count supplying their 'food' as an assault, and taking money for it as a theft.
But it's not a real McDonalds it's just some franchise with the name over the door. Is this the normal experience for McDonalds customers? I've never been to one myself, but it doesn't make me want to try it.
If they put their brand on it then they pay the price in lost brand value when their franchise employees behave like this. If it looks like a McDonalds, and sells McDonalds food then it is a McDonalds.
Who owns Scansoft, who apart from GS are the other big winners from this transaction? They got the world's best speech rec software for a fraction of its true value - I wonder who they were advised by?
We were doing the iterative development model explicitly in the mid 90s. Do you think this model really came from something called 'Agile' or the other way round?
Hopefully the politicians would be happy to see it fail repeatedly - Big content bribes politicians, politicians 'try' to pass bill but fail, big content bribes politicians to have another go, bill fails again. You can see that rinse and repeat is in the politicians best interests, not passing the legislation.
I think there is a slightly different problem with the inflated delivery prices, which is that the retailer sorting algorithms seem to display prices, lowest first, ignoring the delivery cost. This means that if you price your deliveries realistically, your goods will likely be further down the list than they really should. Adding two things together is easy, but in a list of 100 choices, having to do all the additions one by one to work out the lowest price is just stupid when the website should be doing it for you.
I see the will to curtail, but I doubt the means. Trying to stop human beings communicating with each other, whether by statute, technology or force of arms, is pretty much guaranteed to fail. You are probably right that some politicians will support draconian measures, and some businesses will profit from paywalls, but I think history teaches us that this will just be a little noise in the grand scheme of things, and people will carry on doing what people always do.
This would definitely work, but the 'industry' don't want it as they think they should be able to go waaa and have someone else pick up the tab because their business model is stuck in the late 20th century.
Slashdot Mirror
Well done Samsung, I applaud you for improving youir device in this way. Ever since Apple introduced local search my iPhone has been running like a dog. I go to type in a location in the map app and it takes literally 10 seconds for each letter to be typed into the search box. When I search (properly) online with Google for this problem it turns out that the local search kills older iPhones and many people who upgraded to the version of the OS with local search regret upgrading. Leave local search out it's mostly a waste of CPU cycles.
The screen cracked on my 3GS as well and I got it replaced because luckily I took out the insurance when I bought it. Also, once the 18 months initial contract ran out I got a PAYG SIM, so now I pay 10 per month instead of 35. I plan to never upgrade. My phone does what I need it to.
Gore
so we put some robots in your robots to make robots
I think it's a bit much blaming DMCA for the growth of the internet. I think other forces were probably more important.
Even better then. Let the injured parties sue the people who post the content and leave the carriers alone.
That all sounds very expensive and time consuming for both users and ISPs, and in many cases, probably unnecessary. How about this: if someone commits a crime the police investigate, the courts prosecute, and fines are paid/jailtime is done?
This. I was looking to see if this reply w
I'm saying I don't go there.
I guess the problem is that the leaders of the scientific publishing industry went to the same schools, and now go to the same dinner parties, as the people who allocate the science budget.
I wrote to the minister responsible about this, pointing out that if funding is predicated on high-impact publications, but the government wants open publications, then wouldn't it be better to predicate funding on openness. I received a response from the 'BIS Ministerial Correspondence Unit' containing this information: "It may be helpful if I explain that an underpinning principle of the REF, as with the Research Assessment Exercise before it, is that all types of research and all forms of research output across all disciplines shall be assessed on a fair and equal basis. The REF Panels will not make use of journal impact factors, rankings or lists, or the perceived standing of the publisher, in assessing the quality of research outputs submitted. Hence whether the research output has been published in an open access journal, in a 'traditional' journal, or not in a journal at all, will not affect the assessment of its quality in the REF. You might like to be aware of the "Panel criteria and working methods" document which sets out how the REF panels will assess submissions. This is available on the link below: http://www.ref.ac.uk/pubs/2012-01/ I hope that this response addresses the issues you have raised." As you can see, it did not address my concerns, it just pointed to an obscure paragraph buried somewhere that says impact factors are not taken into account in the REF, which from what I understand is the exact opposite of the truth.
The 'feature' is probably that the government will be paying their mates in the content industry (publishers) to ensure that they facilitate open access. Where does the money come from for this? The science budget of course.
I don't think McDonalds employees usually assault their customers and try to steal their belongings. Unless you count supplying their 'food' as an assault, and taking money for it as a theft.
But it's not a real McDonalds it's just some franchise with the name over the door. Is this the normal experience for McDonalds customers? I've never been to one myself, but it doesn't make me want to try it.
If they put their brand on it then they pay the price in lost brand value when their franchise employees behave like this. If it looks like a McDonalds, and sells McDonalds food then it is a McDonalds.
Just to be clear, I really was wondering, I've got no idea.
Who owns Scansoft, who apart from GS are the other big winners from this transaction? They got the world's best speech rec software for a fraction of its true value - I wonder who they were advised by?
We were doing the iterative development model explicitly in the mid 90s. Do you think this model really came from something called 'Agile' or the other way round?
Hopefully the politicians would be happy to see it fail repeatedly - Big content bribes politicians, politicians 'try' to pass bill but fail, big content bribes politicians to have another go, bill fails again. You can see that rinse and repeat is in the politicians best interests, not passing the legislation.
I think there is a slightly different problem with the inflated delivery prices, which is that the retailer sorting algorithms seem to display prices, lowest first, ignoring the delivery cost. This means that if you price your deliveries realistically, your goods will likely be further down the list than they really should. Adding two things together is easy, but in a list of 100 choices, having to do all the additions one by one to work out the lowest price is just stupid when the website should be doing it for you.
UK has some law called something like the Misuse of Computers Act that might apply.
What was the business rules layer coded in?
I see the will to curtail, but I doubt the means. Trying to stop human beings communicating with each other, whether by statute, technology or force of arms, is pretty much guaranteed to fail. You are probably right that some politicians will support draconian measures, and some businesses will profit from paywalls, but I think history teaches us that this will just be a little noise in the grand scheme of things, and people will carry on doing what people always do.
I don't know who FunnyJunk or TheOatmeal are, and this article doesn't inspire me to find out.
This would definitely work, but the 'industry' don't want it as they think they should be able to go waaa and have someone else pick up the tab because their business model is stuck in the late 20th century.