I mean, isn't a pen nothing more than a very very very tiny mouse ball? Sensing it's rotation and position should not be hard asuming you can fiddle with the balls composition.
Please complete this simple exercise:
Write a full page letter without picking up your pen one time. How does that letter look? Because that's exactly how you'd have to write it with your cool pen.
I don't see any novel technology here, only bad design.
Apparantly because you don't understand what is required to make this type of system work?
JESUS H. CHRIST. If I see one more comment like this modded as +5 I'm going to cry!
The paper *IS* the technology development in this case. If you don't understand that, please look at their site again!
If you would just think about how this could possibly work for a second, you'd realize that.
Imagine a pen that works your way -- like an optical mouse that tracks movement. Write a long letter out by hand, and upload it to your computer. How would you expect it to look? If you said "just like my letter," you're wrong! With your 'optical mouse' technology, you'd get (if you're lucky) one long sentence.
The special paper is what allows this thing to know WHERE the pen tip is at at all times. You could draw a circle in the upper right corner, draw a square in the lower left corner, then go back and draw an X in the circle. Then flip a page in the notebook and write a letter. Then go back to page one and draw some more objects.
Now stick the pen in the USB device, download it, and you'll see two separate pages, just exactly as you drew them.
And this is only scratching the surface... no pun intended.
But, if you had a next door neighbor kid who can do just as acceptable of a job, and do it for free, would you still pay your $20 per month?
If I could receive a service for free, and it was of EQUAL QUALITY, of course I would not pay. But if I get better SERVICE by paying, I weigh the costs and make a decision.
Satellite is arguably better than the traditional broadcast outlets, but a majority of the consumers don't see it that way.
The guy I was responding to (maybe you) said he was tired of things going from buying to renting. But this is a service. It was never "for sale."
Look, I never said XM radio is going to become more popular than free radio. Duh, it's not. All my argument is is that it's a viable service, it's got a value that's worth paying for in many situations. Not everyone is going to buy the service, and they don't need everyone to buy it to be successful.
1. The quality sucks (96kbps... yummy) 2. You're still limited to the formats of your local stations, which means limited choice and lots of commercials.
The only thing they've added is shitty digital sound... how exactly is that going to kill satellite radio?
Sure satellite radio seems nice, but everything's too expensive to be worth the trouble. $299+ for the receiver, then another $10/mo for the service. Not a good business model when your competiton is free.
It's a good business model when you have things your "competitor" doesn't... like ad-free stations, digital quality, hundreds of stations to choose from, many things you can't normally get in most areas, and the ability to drive for long distances without losing the same station. If I drove more than I do, I'd get XM in an instant.
Re:What about Apple LCDs?
on
LCD Round-up
·
· Score: 5, Funny
They probably couldn't afford the test monitors...
I'll take some of their genes, please...
on
Pigs with Human Genes
·
· Score: 2, Funny
It doesn't seem like they understand why some things work the way they do.
What you don't realize is that these people are by-and-large libertarians, whose ideals and explanations for how things work have already been drawn out in great detail. Try www.lp.org for a good start. They understand more than you may think.
Define wasteful. There's some that think that healthcare coverage of birth control is 'wasteful'. Others think that unwanted pregnancies cause greater 'wasteful' heatlh expense.
Libertarians would have neither handled by the government. The government is there to protect the people, period.
Who's to judge 'unconstitutional'? Not that I actively pay attention to cases like this, but there's always opposing views. Some think that a law may be unconstitutional, but others have a different perspective that says it is constitutional. So... where's the middle ground? Who's to judge?
Unconstitutional... as defined by libertarians, who pretty much agree on what is and is not unconstitutional.
The person posting asks how you can protect Linux computers from malicious idlescanning, since OpenBSD is the only OS he knows of that doesn't use sequential IPID.
However, the document he linked to (!) clearly states, "The latest versions of Linux, Solaris, and OpenBSD are immune as zombies..."
Of course, you can't keep Linux from being scanned by a zombie, but that has nothing to do with the IPID sequencing. You need some sort of firewall that doesn't respond to SYN requests on closed ports.
Let's see here, in our last election, Bush got 60% of the vote, so with a population of about 600,000 people, that means that roughly 400,000 of them are conservative. So, even if we have 20,000 liberals move here, that still won't change our conservative state!
OK, but these are libertarians, not liberals. Big difference!
I see street-sweeping, electricity, etc. as one of the reasons for government.
This is how you were raised. Libertarians disagree with you, and have lots of statistics to bolster their arguments.
As Enron, and Colifornia have shown private companies cannot be trusted with basic infrastructure.
1. California energy crisis was/is a total sham. The government only reduced restrictions on the wholesale side of the energy pricing. When the energy costs went up, the energy companies couldn't raise the prices they charged consumers, so they went bankrupt. If anything, this bolsters the arguments of libertarians.
2. Enron is just one example of a bad company handling infrastructure. There are hundreds of counterexamples. And if in this free state an Enron-type situation were to arise, other companies would have to step in and take over for them, just like in the outside world.
And, as At&T, the RIAA, and AOLTW have shown eliminating all regulation is the best way to encourage monopolies.
First of all, monopolies are legal and not necessarily 'bad' as long as they were formed legally. Consider reading this document on the libertarian party's position on monopolies.
You can't just pick at certain elements like this without understanding more about libertarian ideals.
A good thing about the American Library Assocition, there are against DMCA and other potential laws that reduce fair use. That is a good thing for open source.
Trust me, if the guy is pouring liquid nitrogen from a foam cup with no protection whatsoever, HE WILL BE A DARWIN AWARD CANDIDATE NOW OR IN THE FUTURE.
That's kinda funny, but far more damage is contributed by stationary polluting sources, like factories. FAR more than any vehicles made in the last 10 years.
We are rapidly approaching a time when most cars will be coming out with zero or near-zero emissions systems. Some are already out now.
Aim your bitching more towards the factories and coal burners of the world. The car companies are literally cleaning up their acts.
"Humanity will be forced to invent some sort of planetary kidney - or it will die from its own waste products."
And I like to call this kidney "outer space."
Let's immediately start shooting our garbage towards that huge blackhole at the center of our galaxy... that "garbage disposal in the sky," if you will.
What does this have to do with SysAdmin'ing? This theme is as old as dirt. Your boss wants you to do something unethical, or they'll fire you.
And you want to hear more stories about this?
WHY??
I thought the point of Ask Slashdot was to be able to learn something. Why didn't you ask something more interesting, such as, Do you think I can win a lawsuit against this company, and on what grounds would I file?
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, isn't a pen nothing more than a very very very tiny mouse ball? Sensing it's rotation and position should not be hard asuming you can fiddle with the balls composition.
Please complete this simple exercise:
Write a full page letter without picking up your pen one time. How does that letter look? Because that's exactly how you'd have to write it with your cool pen.
I don't see any novel technology here, only bad design.
Apparantly because you don't understand what is required to make this type of system work?
JESUS H. CHRIST. If I see one more comment like this modded as +5 I'm going to cry!
The paper *IS* the technology development in this case. If you don't understand that, please look at their site again!
If you would just think about how this could possibly work for a second, you'd realize that.
Imagine a pen that works your way -- like an optical mouse that tracks movement. Write a long letter out by hand, and upload it to your computer. How would you expect it to look? If you said "just like my letter," you're wrong! With your 'optical mouse' technology, you'd get (if you're lucky) one long sentence.
The special paper is what allows this thing to know WHERE the pen tip is at at all times. You could draw a circle in the upper right corner, draw a square in the lower left corner, then go back and draw an X in the circle. Then flip a page in the notebook and write a letter. Then go back to page one and draw some more objects.
Now stick the pen in the USB device, download it, and you'll see two separate pages, just exactly as you drew them.
And this is only scratching the surface... no pun intended.
I think the best thing about this is the possibility of getting emails from people written in their own hand!
Yes, I enjoy trying to decipher everyone's crappy handwriting. Hoorah!
However, I'm inclined to think you'll see more of this not from some stupid pen with special paper, but when tablet pc's become popular.
But, if you had a next door neighbor kid who can do just as acceptable of a job, and do it for free, would you still pay your $20 per month?
If I could receive a service for free, and it was of EQUAL QUALITY, of course I would not pay. But if I get better SERVICE by paying, I weigh the costs and make a decision.
Satellite is arguably better than the traditional broadcast outlets, but a majority of the consumers don't see it that way.
The guy I was responding to (maybe you) said he was tired of things going from buying to renting. But this is a service. It was never "for sale."
Look, I never said XM radio is going to become more popular than free radio. Duh, it's not. All my argument is is that it's a viable service, it's got a value that's worth paying for in many situations. Not everyone is going to buy the service, and they don't need everyone to buy it to be successful.
What made the US a super power?
The size, freedom, military strength, and relatively free market economy enjoyed in this country.
The people in the US that were willing to work all sorts of hours.
There are people like this everywhere in the world. Where are the other superpowers?
The British have some of the freedom and some of the free market economy needed to become a super power, but not the size.
The Chinese have the size and the military strength (maybe), but not the freedom or free market economy.
US became the Hegemony because the US culture has, to varying degrees, penetrated every other culture in the world.
Exactly -- due to our free market economy which has been ingrained into our psyche since the start of the nation.
Now China has the most valuable resource: cheaper than hell labor.
The most valuable resource is intelligence, and following that, an education.
Now all China needs is to reinvent its culture
Translation -- switch from a communist regime to a capitalist regime. Much blood-shed will be required.
and, again, the middle kingdom could be the Hegemony.
And then Neal Stephenson would again be seen as a prophet, but I doubt it.
Dude... real geeks just update their own DNS servers.
Wannabe geeks update their own hosts file.
And dorks update their bookmarks.
Thank you.
I don't know about anything else, but the attempt to shift everything from a "purchase" to "rental" model bothers me enormously.
That's great and all, but this argument does not apply to satellite radio. You are not renting anything. You are paying for a SERVICE.
I pay a guy $20 a month to mow my lawn. I could do it myself for free, but I like the service.
1. The quality sucks (96kbps... yummy)
2. You're still limited to the formats of your local stations, which means limited choice and lots of commercials.
The only thing they've added is shitty digital sound... how exactly is that going to kill satellite radio?
Sure satellite radio seems nice, but everything's too expensive to be worth the trouble. $299+ for the receiver, then another $10/mo for the service. Not a good business model when your competiton is free.
It's a good business model when you have things your "competitor" doesn't... like ad-free stations, digital quality, hundreds of stations to choose from, many things you can't normally get in most areas, and the ability to drive for long distances without losing the same station. If I drove more than I do, I'd get XM in an instant.
They probably couldn't afford the test monitors...
Like the ones that give them half-hour orgasms...
It doesn't seem like they understand why some things work the way they do.
What you don't realize is that these people are by-and-large libertarians, whose ideals and explanations for how things work have already been drawn out in great detail. Try www.lp.org for a good start. They understand more than you may think.
Define wasteful. There's some that think that healthcare coverage of birth control is 'wasteful'. Others think that unwanted pregnancies cause greater 'wasteful' heatlh expense.
Libertarians would have neither handled by the government. The government is there to protect the people, period.
Who's to judge 'unconstitutional'? Not that I actively pay attention to cases like this, but there's always opposing views. Some think that a law may be unconstitutional, but others have a different perspective that says it is constitutional. So... where's the middle ground? Who's to judge?
Unconstitutional... as defined by libertarians, who pretty much agree on what is and is not unconstitutional.
The person posting asks how you can protect Linux computers from malicious idlescanning, since OpenBSD is the only OS he knows of that doesn't use sequential IPID.
However, the document he linked to (!) clearly states, "The latest versions of Linux, Solaris, and OpenBSD are immune as zombies..."
Of course, you can't keep Linux from being scanned by a zombie, but that has nothing to do with the IPID sequencing. You need some sort of firewall that doesn't respond to SYN requests on closed ports.
Am I ready for asynchronous logic?
Let's see here, in our last election, Bush got 60% of the vote, so with a population of about 600,000 people, that means that roughly 400,000 of them are conservative. So, even if we have 20,000 liberals move here, that still won't change our conservative state!
OK, but these are libertarians, not liberals. Big difference!
I see street-sweeping, electricity, etc. as one of the reasons for government.
This is how you were raised. Libertarians disagree with you, and have lots of statistics to bolster their arguments.
As Enron, and Colifornia have shown private companies cannot be trusted with basic infrastructure.
1. California energy crisis was/is a total sham. The government only reduced restrictions on the wholesale side of the energy pricing. When the energy costs went up, the energy companies couldn't raise the prices they charged consumers, so they went bankrupt. If anything, this bolsters the arguments of libertarians.
2. Enron is just one example of a bad company handling infrastructure. There are hundreds of counterexamples. And if in this free state an Enron-type situation were to arise, other companies would have to step in and take over for them, just like in the outside world.
And, as At&T, the RIAA, and AOLTW have shown eliminating all regulation is the best way to encourage monopolies.
First of all, monopolies are legal and not necessarily 'bad' as long as they were formed legally. Consider reading this document on the libertarian party's position on monopolies.
You can't just pick at certain elements like this without understanding more about libertarian ideals.
A good thing about the American Library Assocition, there are against DMCA and other potential laws that reduce fair use. That is a good thing for open source.
Exactly! Praise ALA!
Trust me, if the guy is pouring liquid nitrogen from a foam cup with no protection whatsoever, HE WILL BE A DARWIN AWARD CANDIDATE NOW OR IN THE FUTURE.
Darwin award candidate, surely?
More like common sense.
Sure, today's cars are more efficient than yesterday's, but I think there's a far greater potential for reduction.
Well, there's not. The terms "zero" and "near-zero" emissions should tell you there's not a lot more that can be done for gas-burning automobiles.
However, efficiency can be improved (how many miles they get per gallon). That's something different.
That's kinda funny, but far more damage is contributed by stationary polluting sources, like factories. FAR more than any vehicles made in the last 10 years.
We are rapidly approaching a time when most cars will be coming out with zero or near-zero emissions systems. Some are already out now.
Aim your bitching more towards the factories and coal burners of the world. The car companies are literally cleaning up their acts.
"Humanity will be forced to invent some sort of planetary kidney - or it will die from its own waste products."
And I like to call this kidney "outer space."
Let's immediately start shooting our garbage towards that huge blackhole at the center of our galaxy... that "garbage disposal in the sky," if you will.
So what you're saying is, we could stop receiving spam in our mailbox forever if we would just pay more for a stamp?
I'M SOLD!
What does this have to do with SysAdmin'ing? This theme is as old as dirt. Your boss wants you to do something unethical, or they'll fire you.
And you want to hear more stories about this?
WHY??
I thought the point of Ask Slashdot was to be able to learn something. Why didn't you ask something more interesting, such as, Do you think I can win a lawsuit against this company, and on what grounds would I file?