That was the worst video demo I've seen in recent memory. None of the purported applications were interesting at all.
This was a bunch of students working on a sponsored project and presenting a video of their finished experiment to judges at a conference. The video was probably not even a primary concern, since judges would probably be seeing a live demo. You're living far too pampered a life if you think every product presentation is made with you and your personal needs in mind. Your reaction is an example of corporations ballooning people's sense of entitlement and self-importance to extravagant proportions.
The idea behind experiments like this one is not to immediately produce a salable item or any direct profit, but rather to encourage an environment where new kinds of thinking can emerge which might otherwise not, and thus present us with possibilities not envisioned prior. Another word for this is, "Play".
We have a Communist Party in Canada, and have had one for a long time. This hasn't caused any problems. We also have a "Rhino" party, (or did for many years, anyway.)
When you have a multi-party system representing many voices, then what you are talking about becomes a strength rather than a problem. The more populous voices heard on the floor of the House of Commons, the better. At least in an ideal world, which we clearly do not have.
The problems seem to occur when one party gains too much power. Generally, when lots of people are all thinking the same way within an organized system of government, then it means propaganda and political advertising has won, any by extension, the very forces which are worst for the people are the ones being given all the keys.
Large groups of voting Canadians are becoming more stupid and more easily manipulated as the years go by. Our government is getting downright creepy if you ask me.
...as soon as someone actually manages to take an in-focus photograph.
Good for you. Will you believe in airplanes when somebody manages to take an in-focus photograph of one?
-For the sake of the argument, only photographs of random, unexpected appearances of airplanes should be considered. Not surprisingly, there aren't too many such photos around. The fact of the matter is that it's hard to take good photos of anything in the sky with consumer grade photographic gear on sudden notice.
It's also quite bold to assume that certain of the weird objects which have appeared in the sky are not already blurry by their nature. UFOs tend to be accompanied by episodes of high strangeness which affect our technology in unpredictable ways.
But never fear! There are pictures of weird objects which are quite good. But those ones don't generally count in the minds of people who have already made up their minds.
Not enough someones, if you ask me. Though that rather excellent film is just one very small piece among a great many valuable articles of information available to people today. Luckily, nothing is truly hidden if one spends the time looking, so there's really no good excuse to not be actively attempting to solve the problems presented by the world. -Other than simply not having the brains or the will to grow.
So here's a question for you: are you just another smarmy coward at the back of the class hiding behind dismissive jokes or is there some meat on your bones?
Exponential growth (i.e. interest) is the logical consequence of a system where energy that is collected can be reinvested in energy collectors. When we reach the point where we're collecting all of the universe's energy output I'll agree with you.
The quantity of available Money doesn't expand or contract as a direct consequence of energy availability. Money's availability is arbitrarily controlled by the lenders, and never without creating interest debt. Thus, simply having more energy to spend doesn't mean systemic debt decreases.
Put another way. . .
Growing more potatoes doesn't magically create more dollar bills. Until you can pay your interest debt off in potatoes, the system remains fundamentally broken. Do you see?
Remminds me of the story about the rich man and the poor village....A rich man walks into a hotel in a poor village where all the bussinesses are in debt. He gives the hotelier $100 for a room on the condition that if he doesn't like it he will take the money back and leave. The hotelier gives him the keys, confident the rich man will like the room he takes the $100 and pays the grocer for the food he bought on credit. The grocer takes the $100 and pays back the farmer the money he owes him, the farmer uses it to pay back the blacksmith who then goes to the hotel to pay off his debt to the hooker who in turn gives it to the hotelier for past rent. The rich man comes back dissatisfied with the room, takes the $100 and leaves the village. Nothing has changed but the village is now debt free.
And that's is how things would work in a sane world. (Minus the prostitute.)
And by "Sane" I mean, "Free of Usury". In fact, things would work even better than that, because the Sun keeps pumping energy into the system. The planet is one gigantic solar collector. Logically, scarcity should only ever be a temporary situation at the worst of times because there is simply so much raw energy freely available. But that's not how it works in reality. Why?
Because of the cowardice of the Dark Side and their fear of the Universe and their resulting desire to control all variables so that nothing can hurt their precious, delicate little selves.
I've been trying to boil the idea down to a single sentence. I've not quite managed it yet, but this is what I've got so far to explain how the world has been set up in the ultimate con job. . .
All the money in the world is provided by the banking system. The way all of that money first gets into circulation is by being borrowed by the public and by governments. Borrowing is done at interest. If the banks decide to call in all of those debts, then all the money in the world is now gone. Except interest is still owing. So where does the money come from to pay that interest?
The money isn't the valuable thing. Debt IS, because it automatically creates slaves.
The banks create slaves, and thus control over the entire populace.
That's the con job. It is exactly this simple, and it is exactly how it was intended to work by those who created it.
The way out of the trap is to unplug from dependence upon interest bearing currency. There are many ways to do this. Can you think of any of them? Double points to those who can solve for the big ticket items, such as housing.
Wow. Usually I can understand where the moderators are coming from, but not this time.
It usually takes a fairly significant transgression to get modded down to a zero. -Well, upsetting two people in the same manner, anyway. Still, that's pretty weird. The post is certainly not off topic and neither is it particularly volatile. I wonder what it was that upset the moderators so much.
I've re-posted below just because I find the reaction so interesting. . .
-FL
~~~~
PKD left behind a giant collection of sci-fi weirdness which can be adapted even by a team of monkeys into something interesting for the screen.
But far more importantly than that. . ,
He's dead. He left behind a corpse.
So now nobody has to pay him, or deal with the threat that he might become more than a Tim Burton, (an idiot machine which can be counted on to produce only what his masters want from him.) PKD, together with being a bit insane, had the unsettling tendency to criticize the world and look into places he was not supposed to look. You simply don't give a lot of money, power and media influence to such people. Media influence is reserved for the Fox talking head types. We know exactly what media influence is worth!
So you prevent new voices from rising, or you work hard to reign in and/or destroy old voices. (I'm fairly convinced these days that Lucas was carefully managed in order to prevent Star Wars from waking anybody up.)
But now that PKD is dead, and his legacy so far behind the current curve of social awareness, the studios can safely mine his data without having to worry about paying the piper, (in either money or souls). -And by "the studios" I of course include the various jackals left in charge of his collected works.
Dead artists and idiot machine writers are far more likely to be celebrated and rewarded in today's media precisely because they don't challenge the status quo.
PKD left behind a giant collection of sci-fi weirdness which can be adapted even by a team of monkeys into something interesting for the screen.
But far more importantly than that. . ,
He's dead. He left behind a corpse.
So now nobody has to pay him, or deal with the threat that he might become more than a Tim Burton, (an idiot machine which can be counted on to produce only what his masters want from him.) PKD, together with being a bit insane, had the unsettling tendency to criticize the world and look into places he was not supposed to look. You simply don't give a lot of money, power and media influence to such people. Media influence is reserved for the Fox talking head types. We know exactly what media influence is worth!
So you prevent new voices from rising, or you work hard to reign in and/or destroy old voices. (I'm fairly convinced these days that Lucas was carefully managed in order to prevent Star Wars from waking anybody up.)
But now that PKD is dead, and his legacy so far behind the current curve of social awareness, the studios can safely mine his data without having to worry about paying the piper, (in either money or souls). -And by "the studios" I of course include the various jackals left in charge of his collected works.
Dead artists and idiot machine writers are far more likely to be celebrated and rewarded in today's media precisely because they don't challenge the status quo.
Henry the 8th wants to legalize divorce because it's obviously not HIS fault that he has some venereal disease and cannot sire a child and thus keep his lineage strong. But he must be able to do this without invoking the wrath of the church, keeper of the highest moral law!
If we're going to be calling these software company PR dorks Evangelists then let's skip to the heart of the metaphor, shall we?
The king is insane, has altogether too much power, and the peasants certainly aren't the beneficiaries of any wrangling over IP law.
Apple has for years been a religion replete with thought-control issues and all the brain-shrinking dogma we have come to expect from such creepy organizations, but when exactly did Adobe turn into another damned cult? "Evangelist" is a religious term for some asshole spreading lies with charisma, convincing people to believe in bullshit designed to serve the interests of the church and nobody else. -All done by trumping reason with charm and bullshit. (I know there is probably a more official definition which doesn't imply mind-control and manipulation, but that's not the definition we all grew up knowing and shuddering at, now is it?)
I am so fed up with this kind of idiotic wrangling. I didn't mind Apple when we were feeding its retarded followers to the lions, but I have to say that I am downright nervous about what the iPhone/Pad/Ad is doing to my once-sane universe. (Apple = the New AOL.)
Will somebody please dethrone these megalomaniacs?
I'm amazed that the complaining about iAd primarily consists of "Apple iz putting da ads on our phonez!", instead of "Apple copied AdMob and pretends they invented the idea". The latter is a valid argument, the former just means someone hasn't been paying attention.
How is "Apple copied the idea of selling ads" a valid argument? That's like crying, "Hey, you stole my lunchbox!" when another kid shows up with the same item at school.
This is a huge development. When a MASSIVE revenue stream is suddenly the life blood of Apple, (And it will be; you can take a cut of an app's sale price only once, but ads just keep on giving), it will turn Apple into the new god of media. The "i" experience is going to be little different than television now.
The yucky part is that this was obviously pre-meditated and carefully timed.
Get them addicted to the non-advert experience, build up a head of steam over the iPad and right when everybody has committed, hit them with the news that ad-ware news. They'll be so blushed out with the iPad that we can pull crap like this and the user base will do our arguing and rationalizing for us!
But that's only while they still have something resembling brains. Those will melt away soon enough. And then "i" customers will have successfully become the new AOL crowd.
If you are a USian, then Japanese electrical sockets DO match yours. Otherwise, they do not, but then, neither do North American outlets.
Wow. That's the second time in as many minutes where I've had to question my knowledge about really basic things I thought I knew. I have a weird feeling it's going to be one of those months where I've inadvertently wandered into a section of my mind which happens to be a mine-field of 'wrong'.
I must tread lightly. I wonder what else I'll find. ..?
Even their electrical sockets don't match ours. The metaphor carries nicely.
Never the twain shall meet, and if it does, it'll read backwards, the emotional beats will be in all the wrong places, and the story won't make any damned sense upon reflection. Except for Miyazaki. Somehow, he's managed to transcend the weirdness of his own culture.
If that was the case you would see the whole state of Arizona covered in panels. The reality is that at current installed cost there is no ROI without govt subsidies.
Well, to be fair, I don't know what the reality is on the large scale, (I suspect few honestly do), but I do know that on the small scale it can work out very well. --It's not a direct conversion, to be certain. I know a fellow whose entire house is wired for 12 volts DC, and all of his lighting and other electronic technology has to fit this mode. It hasn't proven to be a particularly complex issue. He and another few people I know have taken different approaches to home-building using non-traditional technologies to heat/insulate and supply power and plumbing, and it really hasn't taken very long at all to justify the initial costs. By contrast, I've lived in houses which cost in excess of $2000 per year for electricity. That adds up fast, and you get no return on investment. After five years in a house like that, you've spent $10,000 and what do you have to show for it?
$10,000 buys a lot of insulation and solar technology. I know a guy who has these huge windows which allow IR in, but not out again, and the light from the sun is cast on this huge, indoor wall of stone which stores and slowly dispenses heat. In the middle of winter, you only need a tee-shirt in that place. And that's just rocks, treated glass and fluff in the walls. Another $6000 and you can buy enough solar electricity generation to run all your technology without the need to attach your home to some corporate meter. It really doesn't take long for this kind of technology to put itself far ahead of the guy next door who still buys electricity and/or heating fuel.
The other thing people seem to ignore in so many of these comparisons, (as per the example with the OP) is the initial costs of installing traditional technologies. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's free, but for some reason the cost of installing normal systems seem to never be in evidence on the balance sheet. It's just, "Oh, well, Solar Cell installation costs X, and I only pay Y per kilowatt, therefore. .."
I think it's just a fear of having to toss out old knowledge one worked hard to obtain in favor of new solutions which drives people to behave in such an odd manner. Like how old people scowl at new fashions. Some geeks thrive on new ideas and the exploration of science. Other geeks don't like new approaches to technology if it threatens their self-esteem and sense of security in already knowing the right answers. Being wrong around here can be such a painful experience that you can understand why New Ways are to be despised. But that's only for some. Some geeks aren't scared of anything.
I spent a minute squinting at your maths in an effort to see things your way.
I think you didn't figure into the generator plan the following expenses. . .
-Initial start-up costs. Large data centers, for instance, will have a couple of huge diesel generators in the basement and they tend to start in the hundreds of thousands of dollars before all the associated costs, (cooling, air circulation, electrical infrastructure, fuel storage) kick in. Diesel back-up power for a whole town would easily be a multi-million dollar endeavor.
-Fuel costs.
-Your projected maintenance costs are not in sync with the real hardware required for the job. Also, you'd need to hire a technician to oversee the operation. Employees are not cheap, and I'm sure this was figured into the town's budget for their battery but left out of yours.
It is entirely possible, given the way politics and city planners work, that poor decisions were made, but even so, towns tend to be on tight budgets and so I'm sure there were at least a few board meetings where the various alternatives were explored with the bottom line being one of the primary concerns.
As well, clean energy is important for many people. The town also installed a field of solar cells to charge the battery between use periods. Solar cells pay for themselves after a few years and then keep on giving, whereas fossil fuel costs are ever-present and unreliable. There are also many hidden costs involved with fossil fuel; for instance, you don't have to build billions of dollars in military hardware and kill thousands of people in order to maintain an oil supply. (Of course, some people prefer the idea of society running on bombs and blood, but there's something deeply screwed up with those people.)
Even if new types of cleaner energy cost a little bit more, (and often new technologies do cost more than tested older tech), then the populace will benefit from knowing that they're not a bunch of loud-mouth assholes. This kind of self-assurance is worth more than money. A happy population is a healthy one.
From my own personal experience, I've noted that loud-mouth assholes tend to live petty lives, have few real friends, and die early of heart-disease. I don't see the appeal myself.
You talk about correcting factual errors and then compare the iPad to a company that does not make any tablets aimed at a computer market. Maybe they do not get the same press coverage because they don't make devices priced or equipped for a mass audience.
We were discussing design, not price. But since you bring it up, price is a function of demand, and no, there is no large scale demand for the tablet PC. That's already been well established. Most people don't actually want them because they're missing basic functionality, ie, no keyboard.
To deal with this, Motion Computing shifted their focus from the regular market to the medical market because nobody was buying their consumer grade gear. But that just makes more poignant how big a desire for the iPad the media has. Apple has created a device which doesn't need a keyboard because it has one overriding purpose; selling content.
Don't think, don't create. Just Pay and Shut Up. The iPad surgically removes the single most astonishing and powerful aspect of the new global communications, that of interactive networking, and turns the internet back into a one-way medium. Television capable of displaying static images. Yay. This is perfect for those who crave such a thing; those who wish to go back to sleep.
There were those tablet PCs several years ago, but since then nobody even tried to improve on those designs. Apple did it and now the inevitable imitators are going to flock to introduce their own versions.
Normally, I'm not the type to correct a factual error since doing so doesn't really turn me on. But in this instance, the factual error leads into an area where I DO find myself fascinated. . .
So first of all, tablet computer manufacturers, while they cater to a small market, have never stopped coming out with better, faster, sleeker models. HP is one of the leaders in that pack, but Motion Computing with its focus on no-keyboard machines hasn't been sitting still and today boasts a robust fleet of excellent models. The latest ones look pretty space-age and they're a helluva lot more powerful than the Apple machine.
The reason, though, that these other brands are not getting the free billion dollar ad push that Apple is getting from all quarters of the media, (and this is the part I'm interested in!), is that none of those other machines are designed with the express purpose of turning all current media into a pay-as-you-go-carnival-of-bullshit which has a chance of succeeding with the mentally-dormant People of Earth.
Big Media, which has undergone a lot of belt-tightening over the last decade thanks to the internet, believes that Apple will save them. And so they're backing Apple all the way in the hopes that if they can convince enough people to pay for things which are normally free, that everybody will get rich, or at least keep their increasingly redundant jobs. (Bearing in mind, that the artists and actual creative working people will be the very last to receive any pennies trickling down from on high, if at all. But that's another story altogether.)
So that's my piece. As you were. Or carry on. Or whatever you feel like doing.
Yeah, I heard an original copy once as well, and while it was dated, it had all the hallmarks of journalism from its period. I can see easily how people tuning in at the wrong moment might have thought it was the real thing. -There were segments where the reporter was doing the whole, "I don't know if anybody is still receiving this, but. .." thing with explosions and ray guns sounding off all around him. Keeping in mind also that the jury hadn't even been assembled, let alone come to any decisions regarding the whole UFO thing at that point in our history.
Further, I don't know what the state of radio drama was at that time, but Orson Wells was certainly an innovator and he might have been breaking entirely new ground with such a story-telling technique. Sort of "Blair Witch", except with audiences having no emotional/intellectual defenses built up through past exposure to similar stories.
Though, on the other side of the coin, I can also see how the story of people being frightened would be a very, very easy (and fun) thing to exaggerate in the telling. Just look at how headlines get pumped up around here. While the shape of media has changed dramatically over the years, it's still humans selling the 'scoop'.
Both of you should be executed for the good of the human race. You are disgusting.
Disgusting? That's an interesting word choice. Am I to understand that my being annoyed with cruel, mean-spirited people is disgusting to you?
Can you explain why that was your reaction, (that and your desire to see me exterminated)? Or if I'm reading you incorrectly, then can please explain what I'm mis-reading?
I'm not trying to hurt you, so don't worry. I'm really just curious.
You've all just been turned into lab rats in a social experiment.
Everybody who pulled out their small man-parts to jump into the blood-bath crucifixion of this brave fellow, (who, on the surface, committed the ultimate crime of trying to start an interesting conversation on a slow news day), FAILED.
Jeez, people.
Are you all still strutting around in kindergarten trying to explain why everybody else's Lego creations are inferior? Still trying to "win" all the authority-figure love?
Grow Up. Think beyond the moment. A little pattern recognition please!
Corporations pay taxes AND employees pay taxes on the same income.
Ah. I see the rationale the corporate lawyer would use; if a corporation is really just a collective effort put forth by investors and workers, why should the income be taxed when it enters their group holdings and then again when divided up among the people who together are the corporation?
Thanks.
-FL
Re:why all the retarded apple stories?
on
iPad Jailbroken
·
· Score: 1
How does it feel to be poor? Anybody who doesn't have an iPad is poor.
This guy is actually more right than he realizes.
The people who are likely to buy iPads are those who are too lost to realize that aligning themselves with corporate culture is a one-way ticket to the Dark Side. These are the people who want others to think for them. In the case of the iPad, this is incredibly obvious; Apple picks which applications are allowed, which media is deemed appropriate, and the manner in which you are allowed to absorb them. It's like a for-profit church, and given that Apple calls its various programming experts "Evangelists" indicates that they bloody-well realize this and in fact promote this impression.
The tone this guy is using, one of disdain and gloating, says a great deal about the quality of the soul, (or lack thereof), one can expect to cultivate by aligning with corporate culture. In a financial climate where people are living in tent cities and starving due to massive corruption and greed, this vile idiot is able to make an off-hand joke about being poor? That's utterly disgusting. And THAT is what lives beneath the cultured veneer of the average Apple user. Make no mistake about that.
So yes, I think Apple certainly does show its true colors with the iPad release.
It is a machine used to suppress not just the human mind, but the human spirit.
Slashdot Mirror
That was the worst video demo I've seen in recent memory. None of the purported applications were interesting at all.
This was a bunch of students working on a sponsored project and presenting a video of their finished experiment to judges at a conference. The video was probably not even a primary concern, since judges would probably be seeing a live demo. You're living far too pampered a life if you think every product presentation is made with you and your personal needs in mind. Your reaction is an example of corporations ballooning people's sense of entitlement and self-importance to extravagant proportions.
The idea behind experiments like this one is not to immediately produce a salable item or any direct profit, but rather to encourage an environment where new kinds of thinking can emerge which might otherwise not, and thus present us with possibilities not envisioned prior. Another word for this is, "Play".
I strongly recommend you look into it.
-FL
We have a Communist Party in Canada, and have had one for a long time. This hasn't caused any problems. We also have a "Rhino" party, (or did for many years, anyway.)
When you have a multi-party system representing many voices, then what you are talking about becomes a strength rather than a problem. The more populous voices heard on the floor of the House of Commons, the better. At least in an ideal world, which we clearly do not have.
The problems seem to occur when one party gains too much power. Generally, when lots of people are all thinking the same way within an organized system of government, then it means propaganda and political advertising has won, any by extension, the very forces which are worst for the people are the ones being given all the keys.
Large groups of voting Canadians are becoming more stupid and more easily manipulated as the years go by. Our government is getting downright creepy if you ask me.
-FL
Most people don't learn how to *think* until their late 20s, if then.
That stuff is called 'irony' and you'll want to watch that you don't get any of it on your skin.
I've found that those who most profoundly believe they know how to think are often the most fabulously knotted up inside.
-FL
...as soon as someone actually manages to take an in-focus photograph.
Good for you. Will you believe in airplanes when somebody manages to take an in-focus photograph of one?
-For the sake of the argument, only photographs of random, unexpected appearances of airplanes should be considered. Not surprisingly, there aren't too many such photos around. The fact of the matter is that it's hard to take good photos of anything in the sky with consumer grade photographic gear on sudden notice.
It's also quite bold to assume that certain of the weird objects which have appeared in the sky are not already blurry by their nature. UFOs tend to be accompanied by episodes of high strangeness which affect our technology in unpredictable ways.
But never fear! There are pictures of weird objects which are quite good. But those ones don't generally count in the minds of people who have already made up their minds.
-FL
Someone recently watched Zeitgeist: The Movie?
Not enough someones, if you ask me. Though that rather excellent film is just one very small piece among a great many valuable articles of information available to people today. Luckily, nothing is truly hidden if one spends the time looking, so there's really no good excuse to not be actively attempting to solve the problems presented by the world. -Other than simply not having the brains or the will to grow.
So here's a question for you: are you just another smarmy coward at the back of the class hiding behind dismissive jokes or is there some meat on your bones?
Waking up takes repeated shocks.
Zap.
-FL
Exponential growth (i.e. interest) is the logical consequence of a system where energy that is collected can be reinvested in energy collectors. When we reach the point where we're collecting all of the universe's energy output I'll agree with you.
The quantity of available Money doesn't expand or contract as a direct consequence of energy availability. Money's availability is arbitrarily controlled by the lenders, and never without creating interest debt. Thus, simply having more energy to spend doesn't mean systemic debt decreases.
Put another way. . .
Growing more potatoes doesn't magically create more dollar bills. Until you can pay your interest debt off in potatoes, the system remains fundamentally broken. Do you see?
-FL
Remminds me of the story about the rich man and the poor village....A rich man walks into a hotel in a poor village where all the bussinesses are in debt. He gives the hotelier $100 for a room on the condition that if he doesn't like it he will take the money back and leave. The hotelier gives him the keys, confident the rich man will like the room he takes the $100 and pays the grocer for the food he bought on credit. The grocer takes the $100 and pays back the farmer the money he owes him, the farmer uses it to pay back the blacksmith who then goes to the hotel to pay off his debt to the hooker who in turn gives it to the hotelier for past rent. The rich man comes back dissatisfied with the room, takes the $100 and leaves the village. Nothing has changed but the village is now debt free.
And that's is how things would work in a sane world. (Minus the prostitute.)
And by "Sane" I mean, "Free of Usury". In fact, things would work even better than that, because the Sun keeps pumping energy into the system. The planet is one gigantic solar collector. Logically, scarcity should only ever be a temporary situation at the worst of times because there is simply so much raw energy freely available. But that's not how it works in reality. Why?
Because of the cowardice of the Dark Side and their fear of the Universe and their resulting desire to control all variables so that nothing can hurt their precious, delicate little selves.
I've been trying to boil the idea down to a single sentence. I've not quite managed it yet, but this is what I've got so far to explain how the world has been set up in the ultimate con job. . .
All the money in the world is provided by the banking system. The way all of that money first gets into circulation is by being borrowed by the public and by governments. Borrowing is done at interest. If the banks decide to call in all of those debts, then all the money in the world is now gone. Except interest is still owing. So where does the money come from to pay that interest?
The money isn't the valuable thing. Debt IS, because it automatically creates slaves.
The banks create slaves, and thus control over the entire populace.
That's the con job. It is exactly this simple, and it is exactly how it was intended to work by those who created it.
The way out of the trap is to unplug from dependence upon interest bearing currency. There are many ways to do this. Can you think of any of them? Double points to those who can solve for the big ticket items, such as housing.
Have a nice day!
-FL
If anyone has read Freakonomics, this headline will come as no surprise.
I've not gotten around to reading Dubner and Levitt yet. In the interim, can you enlighten me with the ballpark notion behind your comment?
Thanks!
-FL
Wow. Usually I can understand where the moderators are coming from, but not this time.
It usually takes a fairly significant transgression to get modded down to a zero. -Well, upsetting two people in the same manner, anyway. Still, that's pretty weird. The post is certainly not off topic and neither is it particularly volatile. I wonder what it was that upset the moderators so much.
I've re-posted below just because I find the reaction so interesting. . .
-FL
~~~~
PKD left behind a giant collection of sci-fi weirdness which can be adapted even by a team of monkeys into something interesting for the screen.
But far more importantly than that. . ,
He's dead. He left behind a corpse.
So now nobody has to pay him, or deal with the threat that he might become more than a Tim Burton, (an idiot machine which can be counted on to produce only what his masters want from him.) PKD, together with being a bit insane, had the unsettling tendency to criticize the world and look into places he was not supposed to look. You simply don't give a lot of money, power and media influence to such people. Media influence is reserved for the Fox talking head types. We know exactly what media influence is worth!
So you prevent new voices from rising, or you work hard to reign in and/or destroy old voices. (I'm fairly convinced these days that Lucas was carefully managed in order to prevent Star Wars from waking anybody up.)
But now that PKD is dead, and his legacy so far behind the current curve of social awareness, the studios can safely mine his data without having to worry about paying the piper, (in either money or souls). -And by "the studios" I of course include the various jackals left in charge of his collected works.
Dead artists and idiot machine writers are far more likely to be celebrated and rewarded in today's media precisely because they don't challenge the status quo.
-FL
PKD left behind a giant collection of sci-fi weirdness which can be adapted even by a team of monkeys into something interesting for the screen.
But far more importantly than that. . ,
He's dead. He left behind a corpse.
So now nobody has to pay him, or deal with the threat that he might become more than a Tim Burton, (an idiot machine which can be counted on to produce only what his masters want from him.) PKD, together with being a bit insane, had the unsettling tendency to criticize the world and look into places he was not supposed to look. You simply don't give a lot of money, power and media influence to such people. Media influence is reserved for the Fox talking head types. We know exactly what media influence is worth!
So you prevent new voices from rising, or you work hard to reign in and/or destroy old voices. (I'm fairly convinced these days that Lucas was carefully managed in order to prevent Star Wars from waking anybody up.)
But now that PKD is dead, and his legacy so far behind the current curve of social awareness, the studios can safely mine his data without having to worry about paying the piper, (in either money or souls). -And by "the studios" I of course include the various jackals left in charge of his collected works.
Dead artists and idiot machine writers are far more likely to be celebrated and rewarded in today's media precisely because they don't challenge the status quo.
-FL
Henry the 8th wants to legalize divorce because it's obviously not HIS fault that he has some venereal disease and cannot sire a child and thus keep his lineage strong. But he must be able to do this without invoking the wrath of the church, keeper of the highest moral law!
If we're going to be calling these software company PR dorks Evangelists then let's skip to the heart of the metaphor, shall we?
The king is insane, has altogether too much power, and the peasants certainly aren't the beneficiaries of any wrangling over IP law.
Apple has for years been a religion replete with thought-control issues and all the brain-shrinking dogma we have come to expect from such creepy organizations, but when exactly did Adobe turn into another damned cult? "Evangelist" is a religious term for some asshole spreading lies with charisma, convincing people to believe in bullshit designed to serve the interests of the church and nobody else. -All done by trumping reason with charm and bullshit. (I know there is probably a more official definition which doesn't imply mind-control and manipulation, but that's not the definition we all grew up knowing and shuddering at, now is it?)
I am so fed up with this kind of idiotic wrangling. I didn't mind Apple when we were feeding its retarded followers to the lions, but I have to say that I am downright nervous about what the iPhone/Pad/Ad is doing to my once-sane universe. (Apple = the New AOL.)
Will somebody please dethrone these megalomaniacs?
-FL
I'm amazed that the complaining about iAd primarily consists of "Apple iz putting da ads on our phonez!", instead of "Apple copied AdMob and pretends they invented the idea". The latter is a valid argument, the former just means someone hasn't been paying attention.
How is "Apple copied the idea of selling ads" a valid argument? That's like crying, "Hey, you stole my lunchbox!" when another kid shows up with the same item at school.
This is a huge development. When a MASSIVE revenue stream is suddenly the life blood of Apple, (And it will be; you can take a cut of an app's sale price only once, but ads just keep on giving), it will turn Apple into the new god of media. The "i" experience is going to be little different than television now.
The yucky part is that this was obviously pre-meditated and carefully timed.
Get them addicted to the non-advert experience, build up a head of steam over the iPad and right when everybody has committed, hit them with the news that ad-ware news. They'll be so blushed out with the iPad that we can pull crap like this and the user base will do our arguing and rationalizing for us!
But that's only while they still have something resembling brains. Those will melt away soon enough. And then "i" customers will have successfully become the new AOL crowd.
-FL
If you are a USian, then Japanese electrical sockets DO match yours. Otherwise, they do not, but then, neither do North American outlets.
Wow. That's the second time in as many minutes where I've had to question my knowledge about really basic things I thought I knew. I have a weird feeling it's going to be one of those months where I've inadvertently wandered into a section of my mind which happens to be a mine-field of 'wrong'.
I must tread lightly. I wonder what else I'll find. . .?
-FL
Yep. The Japanese are alien to us.
Even their electrical sockets don't match ours. The metaphor carries nicely.
Never the twain shall meet, and if it does, it'll read backwards, the emotional beats will be in all the wrong places, and the story won't make any damned sense upon reflection. Except for Miyazaki. Somehow, he's managed to transcend the weirdness of his own culture.
His legs fit into his trousers.
-FL
If that was the case you would see the whole state of Arizona covered in panels. The reality is that at current installed cost there is no ROI without govt subsidies.
Well, to be fair, I don't know what the reality is on the large scale, (I suspect few honestly do), but I do know that on the small scale it can work out very well. --It's not a direct conversion, to be certain. I know a fellow whose entire house is wired for 12 volts DC, and all of his lighting and other electronic technology has to fit this mode. It hasn't proven to be a particularly complex issue. He and another few people I know have taken different approaches to home-building using non-traditional technologies to heat/insulate and supply power and plumbing, and it really hasn't taken very long at all to justify the initial costs. By contrast, I've lived in houses which cost in excess of $2000 per year for electricity. That adds up fast, and you get no return on investment. After five years in a house like that, you've spent $10,000 and what do you have to show for it?
$10,000 buys a lot of insulation and solar technology. I know a guy who has these huge windows which allow IR in, but not out again, and the light from the sun is cast on this huge, indoor wall of stone which stores and slowly dispenses heat. In the middle of winter, you only need a tee-shirt in that place. And that's just rocks, treated glass and fluff in the walls. Another $6000 and you can buy enough solar electricity generation to run all your technology without the need to attach your home to some corporate meter. It really doesn't take long for this kind of technology to put itself far ahead of the guy next door who still buys electricity and/or heating fuel.
The other thing people seem to ignore in so many of these comparisons, (as per the example with the OP) is the initial costs of installing traditional technologies. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's free, but for some reason the cost of installing normal systems seem to never be in evidence on the balance sheet. It's just, "Oh, well, Solar Cell installation costs X, and I only pay Y per kilowatt, therefore. . ."
I think it's just a fear of having to toss out old knowledge one worked hard to obtain in favor of new solutions which drives people to behave in such an odd manner. Like how old people scowl at new fashions. Some geeks thrive on new ideas and the exploration of science. Other geeks don't like new approaches to technology if it threatens their self-esteem and sense of security in already knowing the right answers. Being wrong around here can be such a painful experience that you can understand why New Ways are to be despised. But that's only for some. Some geeks aren't scared of anything.
Too bad you can't heat a building on orneriness!
-FL
I spent a minute squinting at your maths in an effort to see things your way.
I think you didn't figure into the generator plan the following expenses. . .
-Initial start-up costs. Large data centers, for instance, will have a couple of huge diesel generators in the basement and they tend to start in the hundreds of thousands of dollars before all the associated costs, (cooling, air circulation, electrical infrastructure, fuel storage) kick in. Diesel back-up power for a whole town would easily be a multi-million dollar endeavor.
-Fuel costs.
-Your projected maintenance costs are not in sync with the real hardware required for the job. Also, you'd need to hire a technician to oversee the operation. Employees are not cheap, and I'm sure this was figured into the town's budget for their battery but left out of yours.
It is entirely possible, given the way politics and city planners work, that poor decisions were made, but even so, towns tend to be on tight budgets and so I'm sure there were at least a few board meetings where the various alternatives were explored with the bottom line being one of the primary concerns.
As well, clean energy is important for many people. The town also installed a field of solar cells to charge the battery between use periods. Solar cells pay for themselves after a few years and then keep on giving, whereas fossil fuel costs are ever-present and unreliable. There are also many hidden costs involved with fossil fuel; for instance, you don't have to build billions of dollars in military hardware and kill thousands of people in order to maintain an oil supply. (Of course, some people prefer the idea of society running on bombs and blood, but there's something deeply screwed up with those people.)
Even if new types of cleaner energy cost a little bit more, (and often new technologies do cost more than tested older tech), then the populace will benefit from knowing that they're not a bunch of loud-mouth assholes. This kind of self-assurance is worth more than money. A happy population is a healthy one.
From my own personal experience, I've noted that loud-mouth assholes tend to live petty lives, have few real friends, and die early of heart-disease. I don't see the appeal myself.
-FL
You talk about correcting factual errors and then compare the iPad to a company that does not make any tablets aimed at a computer market. Maybe they do not get the same press coverage because they don't make devices priced or equipped for a mass audience.
We were discussing design, not price. But since you bring it up, price is a function of demand, and no, there is no large scale demand for the tablet PC. That's already been well established. Most people don't actually want them because they're missing basic functionality, ie, no keyboard.
To deal with this, Motion Computing shifted their focus from the regular market to the medical market because nobody was buying their consumer grade gear. But that just makes more poignant how big a desire for the iPad the media has. Apple has created a device which doesn't need a keyboard because it has one overriding purpose; selling content.
Don't think, don't create. Just Pay and Shut Up. The iPad surgically removes the single most astonishing and powerful aspect of the new global communications, that of interactive networking, and turns the internet back into a one-way medium. Television capable of displaying static images. Yay. This is perfect for those who crave such a thing; those who wish to go back to sleep.
-FL
There were those tablet PCs several years ago, but since then nobody even tried to improve on those designs. Apple did it and now the inevitable imitators are going to flock to introduce their own versions.
Normally, I'm not the type to correct a factual error since doing so doesn't really turn me on. But in this instance, the factual error leads into an area where I DO find myself fascinated. . .
So first of all, tablet computer manufacturers, while they cater to a small market, have never stopped coming out with better, faster, sleeker models. HP is one of the leaders in that pack, but Motion Computing with its focus on no-keyboard machines hasn't been sitting still and today boasts a robust fleet of excellent models. The latest ones look pretty space-age and they're a helluva lot more powerful than the Apple machine.
The reason, though, that these other brands are not getting the free billion dollar ad push that Apple is getting from all quarters of the media, (and this is the part I'm interested in!), is that none of those other machines are designed with the express purpose of turning all current media into a pay-as-you-go-carnival-of-bullshit which has a chance of succeeding with the mentally-dormant People of Earth.
Big Media, which has undergone a lot of belt-tightening over the last decade thanks to the internet, believes that Apple will save them. And so they're backing Apple all the way in the hopes that if they can convince enough people to pay for things which are normally free, that everybody will get rich, or at least keep their increasingly redundant jobs. (Bearing in mind, that the artists and actual creative working people will be the very last to receive any pennies trickling down from on high, if at all. But that's another story altogether.)
So that's my piece. As you were. Or carry on. Or whatever you feel like doing.
-FL
...that no one has made any boring, unoriginal, or redundant Unobtainium jokes about this article.
And nobody will if you insist on being engaging, unique and first. Cut it out! ;-)
-FL
Yeah, I heard an original copy once as well, and while it was dated, it had all the hallmarks of journalism from its period. I can see easily how people tuning in at the wrong moment might have thought it was the real thing. -There were segments where the reporter was doing the whole, "I don't know if anybody is still receiving this, but. . ." thing with explosions and ray guns sounding off all around him. Keeping in mind also that the jury hadn't even been assembled, let alone come to any decisions regarding the whole UFO thing at that point in our history.
Further, I don't know what the state of radio drama was at that time, but Orson Wells was certainly an innovator and he might have been breaking entirely new ground with such a story-telling technique. Sort of "Blair Witch", except with audiences having no emotional/intellectual defenses built up through past exposure to similar stories.
Though, on the other side of the coin, I can also see how the story of people being frightened would be a very, very easy (and fun) thing to exaggerate in the telling. Just look at how headlines get pumped up around here. While the shape of media has changed dramatically over the years, it's still humans selling the 'scoop'.
-FL
Both of you should be executed for the good of the human race. You are disgusting.
Disgusting? That's an interesting word choice. Am I to understand that my being annoyed with cruel, mean-spirited people is disgusting to you?
Can you explain why that was your reaction, (that and your desire to see me exterminated)? Or if I'm reading you incorrectly, then can please explain what I'm mis-reading?
I'm not trying to hurt you, so don't worry. I'm really just curious.
-FL
You've all just been turned into lab rats in a social experiment.
Everybody who pulled out their small man-parts to jump into the blood-bath crucifixion of this brave fellow, (who, on the surface, committed the ultimate crime of trying to start an interesting conversation on a slow news day), FAILED.
Jeez, people.
Are you all still strutting around in kindergarten trying to explain why everybody else's Lego creations are inferior? Still trying to "win" all the authority-figure love?
Grow Up. Think beyond the moment. A little pattern recognition please!
-FL
Just think; The idiots who have all the money hire idiots like this idiot to implement such idiocy.
You're the reason behind Katrina and Haiti. I hope you get flattened in the next test run.
Idiot.
-FL
Corporations pay taxes AND employees pay taxes on the same income.
Ah. I see the rationale the corporate lawyer would use; if a corporation is really just a collective effort put forth by investors and workers, why should the income be taxed when it enters their group holdings and then again when divided up among the people who together are the corporation?
Thanks.
-FL
How does it feel to be poor? Anybody who doesn't have an iPad is poor.
This guy is actually more right than he realizes.
The people who are likely to buy iPads are those who are too lost to realize that aligning themselves with corporate culture is a one-way ticket to the Dark Side. These are the people who want others to think for them. In the case of the iPad, this is incredibly obvious; Apple picks which applications are allowed, which media is deemed appropriate, and the manner in which you are allowed to absorb them. It's like a for-profit church, and given that Apple calls its various programming experts "Evangelists" indicates that they bloody-well realize this and in fact promote this impression.
The tone this guy is using, one of disdain and gloating, says a great deal about the quality of the soul, (or lack thereof), one can expect to cultivate by aligning with corporate culture. In a financial climate where people are living in tent cities and starving due to massive corruption and greed, this vile idiot is able to make an off-hand joke about being poor? That's utterly disgusting. And THAT is what lives beneath the cultured veneer of the average Apple user. Make no mistake about that.
So yes, I think Apple certainly does show its true colors with the iPad release.
It is a machine used to suppress not just the human mind, but the human spirit.
-FL