However there are many computer friendly people that have no idea what Linux is.
I don't think this matters. I don't think they really know what an OS is. Just don't tell them the machine has Linux.
Xandros (which is installed on the Eee) looks a lot like Windows. It has a start menu in the same place. It has KDE which has equivalents for most of the standard Windows tools. The web browser is on the desktop labelled "web browser" rather than some scary name. I genuinely think that many users will believe that they are running Windows. They consider it to be any system with all those little Window shaped things.
Wearables might come into their own. The screen can be shrunk to the size of a pair of glasses (and a stereo display means you can move the apparent position of the screen). Keyboards are a little more tricky but perhaps people will be okay wearing them on their wrists or on a belt.
Voice commands are interesting. This does need an improvement in technology to really be viable still, but that probably will happen. Then we just need to have someone come up with a really good verbal UI. Yeah, it will happen but I'm not holding my breath.
From the article, "Many run on an operating system called Linux, favored by the technorati but little known among most computer users."
Is this really a problem? I think that most of the people who don't know Linux aren't really aware of what Windows is either. They'll probably call any windowing system "Windows". As long as there are pictures to click on and it opens windows, it will be of little or no concern.
This story wouldn't have come up at all if China wasn't hosting the Olympics. Pulling American athletes out of the games isn't going to harm China, and will make the US look petty.
Many nations boycotted the Moscow Olympics in 1980. This had absolutely no effect on the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. It's better to find another way to protest against China that would actually cause some sort of harm.
Logically this would mean the record industry shouldn't be able to sue any of those 10 downloaders or the 100 who downloaded from them since they have already been compensated for it.
Although if logic was involved then we'd expect them to actually demonstrate it was likely rather than just feasable that that much damage was done.
Maybe there is some legal loophole that prevents states from raising taxes in these situation, but it seems like a loophole that should be closed. This isn't a interstate tariff we're talking about here.
I think Amazon's argument is that it is an interstate tariff (in that it's is both a tariff, and levied on interstate commerce). If they're right, then the loophole is part of the US constitution, although if I understand it, Congress would be able to permit states to levy taxes
Well, okay - maybe not that much but I imagine they're not going to lose out too much from the settlement. Most people are going to go for the 20% off option (they already have a creative mp3 player). I wouldn't be surprised if Creative break even there.
Seriously that's not a disadvantage at all; it's one way we can win.
It has advantages and disadvantages. The main advantage is that without any centralised organisation, it can't be targetted. Most revolutionary groups tend to be organised like this.
It's consistent. The Department of Defense is responsible for attacking other countries. The Fire Department is responsible for extinguishing fires. Clearly, the Department of justice is responsible for preventing any justice from happening.
Yes, but there are anti-RIAA forces that are a lot more organised than they were in pre-DMCA days. I don't think many people on Slashdot really cared about copyright laws until the MPAA sued over DeCSS. These days, the EFF has quite substantial support, politicians realise that there are actually quite a lot of people who think current levels of copyright are too strong, and we're actually pretty organised (albeit in an ad-hoc chaotic way).
I think the anti-surveillance and books on murder are actually quite understandable from a geek. I can easily imagine he wanted to do that because it's fun to pit his wits against the experts. I also think that this was minor evidence. Even removing the car seat could be a coincidence.
Not trying to contact his wife, blood, the lack of other plausible explanation (if she fled, at the very least, her car would be at the airport) make it a pretty hard to picture any other scenario.
Sky do produce some of their own stuff. Which is why I'm a little wary. Brainiac was quite funny. Galactica managed to impress. Apart from that, Sky co-productions have been average to poor, with things like Hex, and The Strangerers. And personally I wasn't all that taken with the Terry Pratchett adaptations.
Yes and no. They're using a fairly new process. They always have issues. Also, yield is rarely going to be as high as 90% which means you have a huge pile of otherwise useless chips. As long as they're not directly competing with your main line of processors, pretty much any price that covers shipping and packaging will make you a profit.
This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, why waste the three good cores and all the energy, time, and resources that went into producing them. Disable the failed core and sell the part as a trio at a discount relative to the quad.
Not only is it reasonable, it's usually part of the design. The productions lines will test all the cores, and disable the broken ones in a fraction of a second, as part of the production process.
Biologists and biochemists often get annoyed by physicists and astronomers speculating on this without any idea whether the types of life they're considering are remotely plausible. They'd be the first to complain if biologists started speculating on the types of planets we might find, or the means we might use to get there.
Just because the military is pioneering this research doesn't mean they are going to make it available for free to the young men and women they are responsible for maiming.
On the other hand, if they can put someone's leg back on, they might be happy that they once again have an active, trained, soldier.
Furthermore, 300,000 soldiers are coming back from Iraq with some kind of mental disorder. You can't grow a new happy mind in a petri dish.
Yes, but not doing this wouldn't help them either. And mental problems can't be solved by throwing money at them, whereas this looks like the sort of problem that can.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm okay with that. I've long ago given up worrying about the intentions of companies. As long as the result is one I like, then I'm happy.
However there are many computer friendly people that have no idea what Linux is.
I don't think this matters. I don't think they really know what an OS is. Just don't tell them the machine has Linux.
Xandros (which is installed on the Eee) looks a lot like Windows. It has a start menu in the same place. It has KDE which has equivalents for most of the standard Windows tools. The web browser is on the desktop labelled "web browser" rather than some scary name. I genuinely think that many users will believe that they are running Windows. They consider it to be any system with all those little Window shaped things.
Wearables might come into their own. The screen can be shrunk to the size of a pair of glasses (and a stereo display means you can move the apparent position of the screen). Keyboards are a little more tricky but perhaps people will be okay wearing them on their wrists or on a belt.
Voice commands are interesting. This does need an improvement in technology to really be viable still, but that probably will happen. Then we just need to have someone come up with a really good verbal UI. Yeah, it will happen but I'm not holding my breath.
From the article, "Many run on an operating system called Linux, favored by the technorati but little known among most computer users."
Is this really a problem? I think that most of the people who don't know Linux aren't really aware of what Windows is either. They'll probably call any windowing system "Windows". As long as there are pictures to click on and it opens windows, it will be of little or no concern.
Because that would be counter productive.
This story wouldn't have come up at all if China wasn't hosting the Olympics. Pulling American athletes out of the games isn't going to harm China, and will make the US look petty.
Many nations boycotted the Moscow Olympics in 1980. This had absolutely no effect on the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. It's better to find another way to protest against China that would actually cause some sort of harm.
Yes, more or less. After a while, membership became mandatory, so very few kids avoided membership.
Plenty? There are some. Not that many though.
and PC owners are used to checking the requirements against their specs. Xbox 360 users expect an Xbox 360 game to work on an Xbox 360.
Logically this would mean the record industry shouldn't be able to sue any of those 10 downloaders or the 100 who downloaded from them since they have already been compensated for it.
Although if logic was involved then we'd expect them to actually demonstrate it was likely rather than just feasable that that much damage was done.
Is the fact that you can't possibly have caused that much damage actually a valid defence against statutory damages?
I think, on average, the typical filesharer will share a single copy. This average does include the people who download only.
Maybe there is some legal loophole that prevents states from raising taxes in these situation, but it seems like a loophole that should be closed. This isn't a interstate tariff we're talking about here.
I think Amazon's argument is that it is an interstate tariff (in that it's is both a tariff, and levied on interstate commerce). If they're right, then the loophole is part of the US constitution, although if I understand it, Congress would be able to permit states to levy taxes
No, it represents Kelvin. The temperature is an absolute scale so there are no degrees.
Fighting in court = 10^9 dollars :P
Well, okay - maybe not that much but I imagine they're not going to lose out too much from the settlement. Most people are going to go for the 20% off option (they already have a creative mp3 player). I wouldn't be surprised if Creative break even there.
Seriously that's not a disadvantage at all; it's one way we can win.
It has advantages and disadvantages. The main advantage is that without any centralised organisation, it can't be targetted. Most revolutionary groups tend to be organised like this.
It's consistent. The Department of Defense is responsible for attacking other countries. The Fire Department is responsible for extinguishing fires. Clearly, the Department of justice is responsible for preventing any justice from happening.
Yes, but there are anti-RIAA forces that are a lot more organised than they were in pre-DMCA days. I don't think many people on Slashdot really cared about copyright laws until the MPAA sued over DeCSS. These days, the EFF has quite substantial support, politicians realise that there are actually quite a lot of people who think current levels of copyright are too strong, and we're actually pretty organised (albeit in an ad-hoc chaotic way).
Honestly - I think he'll be spending his time working out how to escape.
I think the anti-surveillance and books on murder are actually quite understandable from a geek. I can easily imagine he wanted to do that because it's fun to pit his wits against the experts. I also think that this was minor evidence. Even removing the car seat could be a coincidence.
Not trying to contact his wife, blood, the lack of other plausible explanation (if she fled, at the very least, her car would be at the airport) make it a pretty hard to picture any other scenario.
To be honest, that doesn't sound so bad. Hex wasn't great but it was okay, and the same company did Sugar Rush, which I quite liked.
Sky do produce some of their own stuff. Which is why I'm a little wary. Brainiac was quite funny. Galactica managed to impress. Apart from that, Sky co-productions have been average to poor, with things like Hex, and The Strangerers. And personally I wasn't all that taken with the Terry Pratchett adaptations.
What's so unethical about spying on terrorists?
No, I don't agree that this is what they were actually doing, but I think that most of these politicians do.
Yes and no. They're using a fairly new process. They always have issues. Also, yield is rarely going to be as high as 90% which means you have a huge pile of otherwise useless chips. As long as they're not directly competing with your main line of processors, pretty much any price that covers shipping and packaging will make you a profit.
This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, why waste the three good cores and all the energy, time, and resources that went into producing them. Disable the failed core and sell the part as a trio at a discount relative to the quad.
Not only is it reasonable, it's usually part of the design. The productions lines will test all the cores, and disable the broken ones in a fraction of a second, as part of the production process.
Or to put it another way, an organisation that is not the RIAA.
Why not call it the Irish record association, or even better, Irish Recorded Music Association, since that's what they're called.
Hear hear!
Biologists and biochemists often get annoyed by physicists and astronomers speculating on this without any idea whether the types of life they're considering are remotely plausible. They'd be the first to complain if biologists started speculating on the types of planets we might find, or the means we might use to get there.
Just because the military is pioneering this research doesn't mean they are going to make it available for free to the young men and women they are responsible for maiming.
On the other hand, if they can put someone's leg back on, they might be happy that they once again have an active, trained, soldier.
Furthermore, 300,000 soldiers are coming back from Iraq with some kind of mental disorder. You can't grow a new happy mind in a petri dish.
Yes, but not doing this wouldn't help them either. And mental problems can't be solved by throwing money at them, whereas this looks like the sort of problem that can.