Data lifespans are supposed to be about 30 years according to the article, and the discs are supposed to be able to be played on the most recent models of Panasonic DVD players. Hope that answers your questions.
I've always liked the stuff they make. Though at $549 it is a little steep for me right now, I'll be looking forward to getting one of these bad boys eventually. I wonder if the drivers will work with other Panasonic DVD drives... Anyone know? I didn't see that mentioned in the article anywhere.
For those of you complaining that the movie was too short or did not have enough regarding plot and character development:
As I understand it, the movie was supposed to have almost another extra half hour of footage. However, the higher-ups in 20th Century Fox decided it would be better to cut it so that the movie would have a higher action/content ratio. That way the saps going for pure action wouldn't get bored with silly things like a developed plot. Not exactly the best decision on their part, IMHO, but it's understandable.
As for me, I went in to the movie just hoping it wouldn't suck. Going in with that outlook, I left a very happy weeble. I'm looking forward to a "Director's Edition" on DVD. That would please me very much.
Why don't you take action -- make sure that others don't use the software?
Um... he's complaining about the problem and spreading the awareness that it is in fact a Bad Thing. I think I'd classify that as an action that attempts to persuade others to not use this software.
What keeps Mozilla from adopting these features?
As I understand it, these features are proprietary innovations... they only work in IE.
Who knows, maybe in a year or two, after everyone has been saturated by the top 40 crap, they will start getting hungry fo something new.
What makes you think that? We've been saturated with top 40 crap for YEARS and not many more people have shown a hunger yet. I don't foresee people letting go of their protective top 40 blanket anytime soon. It's just too easy to let other people tell you what's good than to listen and decide for yourself.
My one wish is that, as a comic-to-film movie, the quality is in line with the likes of the first Batman movie as opposed to that last piece of Batman trash that I still regret spending money on seeing in the theatre.
Though a pretty good article, I think the premise is somewhat flawed. Sure, the dream of technology is that it will free us from grunt work and give us more time to do other things. The way this is supposed to work is that, with the new tech, you do the same amount of work in less time. This means you can get off work earlier and enjoy life, right? No such luck, Skippy. You (and your employer) are used to putting in so many hours. You don't think in terms of tasks to get done, you think in 8-hour blocks of time that you spend at the office. The result? You do more work in the same amount of time. Nothing changes. You make more progress and get to the next task faster than you would have before. The idea of getting more leisure time from increased productivity at work is a myth that IMHO will never be realized. There is always more to get done.
Humans get bored when all they have is leisure time.
This is a poor excuse for a rebuttal, but I'm going to say it anyway.
Naming everything (or at least classifying things) can be extremely useful. An example that pops immediately into mind is biology. Everything there is named and categorized very discretely and specificly. In fact, when biologists go out into the field, they typically further the naming convention to the specific life form they're observing (Bob the alpha male of this pack of grey wolves.. or whatever... think Discovery Channel).
Let's take your can of soda as another example. You don't explicitly name it "mysoda7-7-00.pop" but you are aware that a) it is a soda, b) it is your soda, c) it is your soda that you have right now, d) your current soda has 3 gulps left until the can is empty.
a-c are covered in that name for your soda, and d acts as the content. I don't see this as an un-natural or non-logical way of thinking. In fact, it very well be that your mind saves this information this way without you being aware of it. The difference between your mind and a computer is that your mind is naming your soda for you. On a computer, you've got to do the naming. That's one of the things the article was hinting at, I think. Everything can still have a name, you just don't have to be directly aware of what that name is.
Of course, there is the very distict possibility that I'm talking out of my ass...
Agreed, the names are kinda silly, but to the contrary, there are other weird-ass names like this. Some good examples (probably seen even in Intel at least occasionally):
LSI Circuit - Large Scale Integraged Circuit
VLSI Circuit - Very Large Scale Integrated Circuit
VHF - Very High Frequency
UHF - Ultra High Frequency
You see stuff like this a lot in scientific research. Apparently, terms like "very" and "ultra", and now "overwelming" (new to me) have specific value ranges associated with them.
Of course, there is the chance that I don't know what I'm talking about...
By showing where the legal mp3s are, they're saying, "This stuff is safe to get and do what you please with it. Go play." And by assuming all other mp3s are illegal, they are not condoning it, but instead saying something to the effect of, "This is not safe, play at your own risk." I don't go to MP3Board, but I would guess that they have something on their site that says this (like a disclaimer or something). Can anyone verify this?
Personally, I don't think that limiting people's ability to point to illegal material is a good idea. This is mainly because the definition of what is illegal is prone to change with time and with location (i.e. what is illegal in the US may not be illegal in other parts of the world).
Slashdot Mirror
Data lifespans are supposed to be about 30 years according to the article, and the discs are supposed to be able to be played on the most recent models of Panasonic DVD players. Hope that answers your questions.
I've always liked the stuff they make. Though at $549 it is a little steep for me right now, I'll be looking forward to getting one of these bad boys eventually. I wonder if the drivers will work with other Panasonic DVD drives... Anyone know? I didn't see that mentioned in the article anywhere.
For those of you complaining that the movie was too short or did not have enough regarding plot and character development:
As I understand it, the movie was supposed to have almost another extra half hour of footage. However, the higher-ups in 20th Century Fox decided it would be better to cut it so that the movie would have a higher action/content ratio. That way the saps going for pure action wouldn't get bored with silly things like a developed plot. Not exactly the best decision on their part, IMHO, but it's understandable.
As for me, I went in to the movie just hoping it wouldn't suck. Going in with that outlook, I left a very happy weeble. I'm looking forward to a "Director's Edition" on DVD. That would please me very much.
Why don't you take action -- make sure that others don't use the software?
Um... he's complaining about the problem and spreading the awareness that it is in fact a Bad Thing. I think I'd classify that as an action that attempts to persuade others to not use this software.
What keeps Mozilla from adopting these features?
As I understand it, these features are proprietary innovations... they only work in IE.
Hope I helped...
Who knows, maybe in a year or two, after everyone has been saturated by the top 40 crap, they will start getting hungry fo something new.
What makes you think that? We've been saturated with top 40 crap for YEARS and not many more people have shown a hunger yet. I don't foresee people letting go of their protective top 40 blanket anytime soon. It's just too easy to let other people tell you what's good than to listen and decide for yourself.
My one wish is that, as a comic-to-film movie, the quality is in line with the likes of the first Batman movie as opposed to that last piece of Batman trash that I still regret spending money on seeing in the theatre.
Hey, we all have to have our standards.
Though a pretty good article, I think the premise is somewhat flawed. Sure, the dream of technology is that it will free us from grunt work and give us more time to do other things. The way this is supposed to work is that, with the new tech, you do the same amount of work in less time. This means you can get off work earlier and enjoy life, right? No such luck, Skippy. You (and your employer) are used to putting in so many hours. You don't think in terms of tasks to get done, you think in 8-hour blocks of time that you spend at the office. The result? You do more work in the same amount of time. Nothing changes. You make more progress and get to the next task faster than you would have before. The idea of getting more leisure time from increased productivity at work is a myth that IMHO will never be realized. There is always more to get done.
Humans get bored when all they have is leisure time.
This is a poor excuse for a rebuttal, but I'm going to say it anyway.
Naming everything (or at least classifying things) can be extremely useful. An example that pops immediately into mind is biology. Everything there is named and categorized very discretely and specificly. In fact, when biologists go out into the field, they typically further the naming convention to the specific life form they're observing (Bob the alpha male of this pack of grey wolves.. or whatever... think Discovery Channel).
Let's take your can of soda as another example. You don't explicitly name it "mysoda7-7-00.pop" but you are aware that
a) it is a soda,
b) it is your soda,
c) it is your soda that you have right now,
d) your current soda has 3 gulps left until the can is empty.
a-c are covered in that name for your soda, and d acts as the content. I don't see this as an un-natural or non-logical way of thinking. In fact, it very well be that your mind saves this information this way without you being aware of it. The difference between your mind and a computer is that your mind is naming your soda for you. On a computer, you've got to do the naming. That's one of the things the article was hinting at, I think. Everything can still have a name, you just don't have to be directly aware of what that name is.
Of course, there is the very distict possibility that I'm talking out of my ass...
Buy the new Intel Septum... er Septium.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Agreed, the names are kinda silly, but to the contrary, there are other weird-ass names like this. Some good examples (probably seen even in Intel at least occasionally):
LSI Circuit - Large Scale Integraged Circuit
VLSI Circuit - Very Large Scale Integrated Circuit
VHF - Very High Frequency
UHF - Ultra High Frequency
You see stuff like this a lot in scientific research. Apparently, terms like "very" and "ultra", and now "overwelming" (new to me) have specific value ranges associated with them.
Of course, there is the chance that I don't know what I'm talking about...
I believe the guy said 100km... being 100,000 METERS, about three times more than 105,000 feet.
Then again, if you were just giving a little anecdote, I apologize.
What if they look at it this way:
By showing where the legal mp3s are, they're saying, "This stuff is safe to get and do what you please with it. Go play." And by assuming all other mp3s are illegal, they are not condoning it, but instead saying something to the effect of, "This is not safe, play at your own risk." I don't go to MP3Board, but I would guess that they have something on their site that says this (like a disclaimer or something). Can anyone verify this?
Personally, I don't think that limiting people's ability to point to illegal material is a good idea. This is mainly because the definition of what is illegal is prone to change with time and with location (i.e. what is illegal in the US may not be illegal in other parts of the world).
Just my contribution...
Are they going to use C# for the programming? It seems oddly appropriate.
Quick, hide! They're arming themselves with fruits and vegetables!