I also got a hold of one of the first 100 of these hand soldered models (number 43 if you're wondering) that was mentioned in a past Slashdot article.
- It's open source firmware and perl server mean you can hack the hell out of it yourself.
- Random, repeat, playlists, it's all here baby.
- Browser configuration and control like the audiotron, but it's instant, and doesn't make the player skip (it's really quite sad that the Audiotron does).
- Random, repeat, playlists, it's all here.
- Streaming of Internet radio stations.
- Future enhancements include alarm clock functions and I'm sure a hell of a lot more. The server can handle players throughout your house as well.
I certainly don't trust any opinions on Slashdot where MS is concerned. The hatred for anything the company does is so rife I'm sure that even if they gave away free money, you'd claim they were just doing it in order to put Fort Knox out of business.
But anyway.... smart tags.
Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I can see exactly where MS's thinking was going with this one. If you're doing research on a particular subject (quantum physics for example) wouldn't it be great if all those complicated terms that were used, or all the times prominent physicists (sp?) were mentioned that they were squiggly underlined with a link to more information about that subject or person? Without you have to open up Google and search yourself?
It sure sounds like a good time saver to me, cross referencing everything with everything else is exactly why sites like Everything2 or IMDB are so useful. MS are bringing that to the whole web.
If it can be switched on/off in the browser (and can be switched off by those pages that really don't want to allow it - even if their reader does) then where's the issue?
If the mozilla group came up with this you'd love it.
Webdog (www.webdog.org) has been tracking developer.plans (such as John Carmack) and website updates for years. Before this Mind-it technology was released anyway.
It doesn't use the same method, but it's hardly rocket science anyway. I might track down a list of all their patents, see what "tracking technology" methods we had before they did.
I truely believe that MS, when they invested all the money in Apple a few years back, got an agreement from them about not competing with MS on the x86 platform. If they did, MS would take away IE and more importantly from Apple's POV - Office.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like the deal Apple got along with their $150 million.
I've tried numerous times to come up with a protocol spec for Viewdata, sometimes known as Prestel or a VT110 (or it might be VT100) terminal system. An old videotext system designed by British Telecom in the 70's (the system they tried to claim they had the patent for hyperlinks on).
Every travel agent in the UK still uses this system to book holidays with tour operators, but even though I can find a few mentions of it on the web, never anything like the protocol (as I'd like to write a viewdata client).
I don't know why everybody automatically takes this as an "invasion of privacy". As far as I am aware, the UK has more camera survelliance than anywhere else in the world (it's high up the league tables anyway) and nobody complains about them. You don't notice them. They're a part of every day life and they have reduced crime figures and made the streets safer.
Now why should I be worried that there are videotapes of me walking along the street? I'm in public already, hundreds of other people are going to see me - so why should the fact that it's recorded by an "invasion of privacy"? Where's my privacy to start with, since I'm outside? In public? Why do you care that there is a record of you being there? What do you think is going to happen because the council have a tape of you walking along a street with hundreds of others? I can see your argument if they tried to put cameras in your home, that is an invasion of privacy because you're in private. Outside you're not.
Oh yea, and it stops crime. So we have stopping violent crime versus getting rid of a camera you don't pay any attention to and happens to record you as you walk past. Knowing the kind of violent crime that has been stopped on the streets of Britain already (and I have been a victim, and they were never caught) that's a real tough choice.
Now not all the same arguments can be applied to the DNA database, I still think calling it an "invasion of privacy" is a bit over the top though. Again, if it stops crime, what's the harm? What have you got to hide? If you're innocent, why do you worry that something can be related back to you?
Somebody else here made the point of the murder victim having a hair on them belonging to you, because you met them earlier that day. But you didn't do the killing, but still get put in jail because of the DNA from the hair matching the database. Pllleeease, not only is that evidence purely circumstantial, but no court would convict you of murder because your hair was in somebodys jumper. DNA database or not.
Real invasions of privacy come when they want to see something they really don't have any right to, getting inside your home, making you hand over passwords and PGP keys, monitoring your phone calls, emails etc are much more serious invasions of privacy - and if they start doing that, then you'll see me kicking up a stink.
But in the meantime, if they want to reduce crime by filming me in public or being able to match my whereabouts to a crime scene, then they can feel free. I don't have anything to hide in those already public sitations.
Slashdot Mirror
I also got a hold of one of the first 100 of these hand soldered models (number 43 if you're wondering) that was mentioned in a past Slashdot article.
- It's open source firmware and perl server mean you can hack the hell out of it yourself.
- Random, repeat, playlists, it's all here baby.
- Browser configuration and control like the audiotron, but it's instant, and doesn't make the player skip (it's really quite sad that the Audiotron does).
- Random, repeat, playlists, it's all here.
- Streaming of Internet radio stations.
- Future enhancements include alarm clock functions and I'm sure a hell of a lot more. The server can handle players throughout your house as well.
I can't fault it.
....for a business to make money these days.
I certainly don't trust any opinions on Slashdot where MS is concerned. The hatred for anything the company does is so rife I'm sure that even if they gave away free money, you'd claim they were just doing it in order to put Fort Knox out of business.
But anyway.... smart tags.
Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I can see exactly where MS's thinking was going with this one. If you're doing research on a particular subject (quantum physics for example) wouldn't it be great if all those complicated terms that were used, or all the times prominent physicists (sp?) were mentioned that they were squiggly underlined with a link to more information about that subject or person? Without you have to open up Google and search yourself?
It sure sounds like a good time saver to me, cross referencing everything with everything else is exactly why sites like Everything2 or IMDB are so useful. MS are bringing that to the whole web.
If it can be switched on/off in the browser (and can be switched off by those pages that really don't want to allow it - even if their reader does) then where's the issue?
If the mozilla group came up with this you'd love it.
Webdog (www.webdog.org) has been tracking developer .plans (such as John Carmack) and website updates for years. Before this Mind-it technology was released anyway.
It doesn't use the same method, but it's hardly rocket science anyway. I might track down a list of all their patents, see what "tracking technology" methods we had before they did.
Stupid patents.
The problem..... Microsoft.
I truely believe that MS, when they invested all the money in Apple a few years back, got an agreement from them about not competing with MS on the x86 platform. If they did, MS would take away IE and more importantly from Apple's POV - Office.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like the deal Apple got along with their $150 million.
I've tried numerous times to come up with a protocol spec for Viewdata, sometimes known as Prestel or a VT110 (or it might be VT100) terminal system. An old videotext system designed by British Telecom in the 70's (the system they tried to claim they had the patent for hyperlinks on).
Every travel agent in the UK still uses this system to book holidays with tour operators, but even though I can find a few mentions of it on the web, never anything like the protocol (as I'd like to write a viewdata client).
Alternate .plan URL since the one listed is busted.
Just in case you can't use a finger client.
I don't know why everybody automatically takes this as an "invasion of privacy". As far as I am aware, the UK has more camera survelliance than anywhere else in the world (it's high up the league tables anyway) and nobody complains about them. You don't notice them. They're a part of every day life and they have reduced crime figures and made the streets safer.
Now why should I be worried that there are videotapes of me walking along the street? I'm in public already, hundreds of other people are going to see me - so why should the fact that it's recorded by an "invasion of privacy"? Where's my privacy to start with, since I'm outside? In public? Why do you care that there is a record of you being there? What do you think is going to happen because the council have a tape of you walking along a street with hundreds of others? I can see your argument if they tried to put cameras in your home, that is an invasion of privacy because you're in private. Outside you're not.
Oh yea, and it stops crime. So we have stopping violent crime versus getting rid of a camera you don't pay any attention to and happens to record you as you walk past. Knowing the kind of violent crime that has been stopped on the streets of Britain already (and I have been a victim, and they were never caught) that's a real tough choice.
Now not all the same arguments can be applied to the DNA database, I still think calling it an "invasion of privacy" is a bit over the top though. Again, if it stops crime, what's the harm? What have you got to hide? If you're innocent, why do you worry that something can be related back to you?
Somebody else here made the point of the murder victim having a hair on them belonging to you, because you met them earlier that day. But you didn't do the killing, but still get put in jail because of the DNA from the hair matching the database. Pllleeease, not only is that evidence purely circumstantial, but no court would convict you of murder because your hair was in somebodys jumper. DNA database or not.
Real invasions of privacy come when they want to see something they really don't have any right to, getting inside your home, making you hand over passwords and PGP keys, monitoring your phone calls, emails etc are much more serious invasions of privacy - and if they start doing that, then you'll see me kicking up a stink.
But in the meantime, if they want to reduce crime by filming me in public or being able to match my whereabouts to a crime scene, then they can feel free. I don't have anything to hide in those already public sitations.