First off, I'd like to say PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE give a little more information in your clip about what it is you're talking about. Especially when you're linking to a site like NYT that requires registration. Basically your post said to me, "Here's a story. I don't have any real thoughts about it, but maybe if I submit it Slashdot will post it."
Cheers to you Slashdot for continuing the tradition of MLP.
*DISLCAIMER* I haven't had my cup of coffee yet this morning.
"The reason we're in a bind," says Kranich from her office at New York University, "is that the price of some of the materials has skyrocketed, without any explanation." She cites one chemistry journal, Tetrahedron Letters, that costs $14,000 a year.
Now lets see.... do I buy that quad-processor dream computer or 12 issues of Tetrahedron Letters?
"And Amazon takes a hefty chunk of each payment in processing fees. But perhaps this model could be useful for sites which need cash but don't want to serve advertising."
True, but what happens if the site using the tipjar banks on that as their income source and then Amazon rips it out from under them. That's one quick way to kill a website, I'd think.
I'd still keep a backup option before relying on this as my method of cash generation.
"Enhancements being considered include a miniature camera, microphone, communication device, and chemical micro-sensor."
So these features aren't there yet, but could be considered in the future. I'm not so sure of the capabilities of these robots until they actually have the features.
I see unprecedented possibilities for human mind control. One of those things crawls inside your ears or nose and latches onto your brain stem and *WHAMMO*. I'm serious, I swear, I saw something like this on Star Trek once....
then you probably have your answer. Once you start wondering, if you don't decide to move on how much time will you spend thinking about what you might have been doing if you had left this job. Your friends will understand, they're probably thinking the same things, even if they won't say so.
There won't be widespread use until....
on
Digital Doctoring
·
· Score: 2
it becomes easier to input data into these things. Working in a medical/computing field, I know that paperwork is a pain in the ass and there's no way around doing the paperwork. But for now, I'd much rather spend the time filling out my forms, than Graffiti-ing my information in, erasing the mistakes, then reverifying that it's all correct.
Maybe when they have good voice recognition for the Palm, then it might really look like a sexy alternative to pad and pen. But not yet.
It seems like it would be quite difficult to obtain a patent on any kind of software. Mr. Ullman describes three guidelines for software to be patentable:
The idea must be "novel"
The idea must be "nonobvious"
The idea must be useful
The one that seems particularly difficult here is the nonobvious part. Mr. Ullman says that "novel" simply means it does not appear in previous literature. But for software to be nonobvious....
It seems that there are so many ways to achieve the same results with software, that it'd be very difficult to come up with something that someone else couldn't figure out to do in a completely different way.
The neat thing about this, though, is that someone who has truly stumbled on something fantasticly useful, unique, and clever is rewarded. RSA for example....
This kind of stuff has been done at Middle and High Schools for at least a year now. If you talk to most of the kids they really don't care about seeing advertisments. You don't really look at the ones at the top of the Slashdot page do you?
My point is that advertising is everywhere and we really can't do much about where companies can advertise. Schools are the best place for companies to advertise because the students can't help but see it.
Anyone who cannot see that these cases represent something bigger than themselves is not looking hard enough. I don't think I have to go on at length about this because you already know, but just to name a few points:
Software writers liable for how their software is used
Interpretations of copyright laws that basically deny developers their ability to create. (DeCSS in particular)
Most importantly, even the government can't stop multitudes of independent users that come together to share information
Regardless of the outcome of these cases, I hope the plaintiffs fall flat on their faces, there will still be people out there willing to risk this kind of crap to bring new technology to the people.
AFAIK every programming language can be set down, albeit long and complex, in a set of rules in BNF (Bacchus-Naur Form) which shows exactly how any statement in the language can be derived. So it really wouldn't make any difference what language the rules were in as long as they followed the same derivation. So one could create a Russian version of C that simply replaces the english words with appropriate Russian ones, but uses the same structure.
"The Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the move to compel release of "all records" on Carnivore."
Why would anyone want these records released to the public??? If the real concern here is privacy of communication why would we want our emails publicly displayed?? I guess it's better to know what the spooks know about us, than to be guessing about it...
I don't think the court should even have considered shutting down Napster at this point. Shutting it off before a verdict can even be arrived at is a little like believing them guilty until proven innocent.
"The FTC issued a report that praised the NAI deal but also called on Congress to pass a consumer-privacy law to cover firms the organization does not represent."
Self-regulation sounds a lot like the FBI saying they'll be completely fair with their use of Carnivore. This doesn't mean jack to me until there is legislation preventing these sites from gathering this kind of information. Until then, surf anonymously or just give up the right to privacy.
Rise up, fellow Slashdotters! Let us not take this lying down. We will become a band of freedom-fighting desperados... never using the same computer twice so that the government cannot find us. We'll bring Open Source to the people and promote RMS for president. Oh it will be glorious!
"If we fail to protect and preserve our intellectual property system, the culture will atrophy."
Baloney!!! The reason that our culture goes anywhere is because future developments are built off of ideas that come before. This is like saying that "Just because you learned how to read doesn't mean that you should be able to write." Sadly, I don't know what the lowly unwashed masses can do to prevent this.
"I would venture that half of the "86%" of users who are using IE now have never even seen Netscape's browser. Remember, in the past two years, more and more people have come on the 'Net -- what's that percentage? half of the current Internet users? -- and the first and only application they use is IE."
It's hard to remember in this kind of gathering that most Internet users don't know a damned thing about web standards. They've never heard of Cascading Style Sheets or Document Object Models or XML. Their computer comes with a handy "The Internet" icon on the desktop and that's all that they know. Anyone that has experience selling systems to users knows that most people are looking to get on the Internet and IE provides the easiest way to do that (or at least has for the last few years).
Anyone that touts Mozilla's capacity for regaining marketshare bases that assumption on the fact that it is standards-compliant. But, as Nelson points out, to regain market share Netscape must pull users away from IE. And if most of those users are just Jimmy-bob-with-an-ISP they're not going to care to download a ~20MB standards-compliant browser when they have a jim-dandy one already.
Don't get me wrong, I think Mozilla is awesome too. I'm all for standards and taking shots at M$, but I think Netscape has missed the boat here and it's going to take a lot of work to bring things back to their side.
Sometimes it is just scary thinking about what Microsoft is capable of.
One doesn't have to look too far back in the past to remember when Microsoft was not interested in the Web... remember using Lynx or Mosaic or early versions of Netscape. Once the Net started looking like it would be a big hit, M$ hopped right on the bandwagon. And today, they have 85% of the browser market???
Either this means that they are making really high quality software that everyone wants to use or they are pulling this kind of strong-handed business that we're used to from them.
But the thing to remember is that M$ is just a company and all they want to do is make money. Despite the best intentions and the sweet words that BG says on TV, they don't really care about innovation. So, rather than moving the capabilities of the Web forward, they are making their own advancements and forcing others to come along with them.
Maybe Supreme Court intervention will make a difference, but I'm not counting on it.
Slashdot Mirror
Cheers to you Slashdot for continuing the tradition of MLP.
*DISLCAIMER* I haven't had my cup of coffee yet this morning.
Now lets see.... do I buy that quad-processor dream computer or 12 issues of Tetrahedron Letters?
I'd still keep a backup option before relying on this as my method of cash generation.
I see unprecedented possibilities for human mind control. One of those things crawls inside your ears or nose and latches onto your brain stem and *WHAMMO*. I'm serious, I swear, I saw something like this on Star Trek once....
then you probably have your answer. Once you start wondering, if you don't decide to move on how much time will you spend thinking about what you might have been doing if you had left this job. Your friends will understand, they're probably thinking the same things, even if they won't say so.
Maybe when they have good voice recognition for the Palm, then it might really look like a sexy alternative to pad and pen. But not yet.
I think I'll just wait until those tracks show up on the dark, seedy side of Napster. No need to abase myself for paying for something I can steal!
The one that seems particularly difficult here is the nonobvious part. Mr. Ullman says that "novel" simply means it does not appear in previous literature. But for software to be nonobvious....
It seems that there are so many ways to achieve the same results with software, that it'd be very difficult to come up with something that someone else couldn't figure out to do in a completely different way.
The neat thing about this, though, is that someone who has truly stumbled on something fantasticly useful, unique, and clever is rewarded. RSA for example....
My point is that advertising is everywhere and we really can't do much about where companies can advertise. Schools are the best place for companies to advertise because the students can't help but see it.
Regardless of the outcome of these cases, I hope the plaintiffs fall flat on their faces, there will still be people out there willing to risk this kind of crap to bring new technology to the people.
AFAIK every programming language can be set down, albeit long and complex, in a set of rules in BNF (Bacchus-Naur Form) which shows exactly how any statement in the language can be derived. So it really wouldn't make any difference what language the rules were in as long as they followed the same derivation. So one could create a Russian version of C that simply replaces the english words with appropriate Russian ones, but uses the same structure.
Why would anyone want these records released to the public??? If the real concern here is privacy of communication why would we want our emails publicly displayed?? I guess it's better to know what the spooks know about us, than to be guessing about it...
I don't think the court should even have considered shutting down Napster at this point. Shutting it off before a verdict can even be arrived at is a little like believing them guilty until proven innocent.
Self-regulation sounds a lot like the FBI saying they'll be completely fair with their use of Carnivore. This doesn't mean jack to me until there is legislation preventing these sites from gathering this kind of information. Until then, surf anonymously or just give up the right to privacy.
Rise up, fellow Slashdotters! Let us not take this lying down. We will become a band of freedom-fighting desperados... never using the same computer twice so that the government cannot find us. We'll bring Open Source to the people and promote RMS for president. Oh it will be glorious!
Baloney!!! The reason that our culture goes anywhere is because future developments are built off of ideas that come before. This is like saying that "Just because you learned how to read doesn't mean that you should be able to write." Sadly, I don't know what the lowly unwashed masses can do to prevent this.
"Comes autographed by the id development team and an official certificate of authenticity!"
"I would venture that half of the "86%" of users who are using IE now have never even seen Netscape's browser. Remember, in the past two years, more and more people have come on the 'Net -- what's that percentage? half of the current Internet users? -- and the first and only application they use is IE."
It's hard to remember in this kind of gathering that most Internet users don't know a damned thing about web standards. They've never heard of Cascading Style Sheets or Document Object Models or XML. Their computer comes with a handy "The Internet" icon on the desktop and that's all that they know. Anyone that has experience selling systems to users knows that most people are looking to get on the Internet and IE provides the easiest way to do that (or at least has for the last few years).
Anyone that touts Mozilla's capacity for regaining marketshare bases that assumption on the fact that it is standards-compliant. But, as Nelson points out, to regain market share Netscape must pull users away from IE. And if most of those users are just Jimmy-bob-with-an-ISP they're not going to care to download a ~20MB standards-compliant browser when they have a jim-dandy one already.
Don't get me wrong, I think Mozilla is awesome too. I'm all for standards and taking shots at M$, but I think Netscape has missed the boat here and it's going to take a lot of work to bring things back to their side.
One doesn't have to look too far back in the past to remember when Microsoft was not interested in the Web... remember using Lynx or Mosaic or early versions of Netscape. Once the Net started looking like it would be a big hit, M$ hopped right on the bandwagon. And today, they have 85% of the browser market???
Either this means that they are making really high quality software that everyone wants to use or they are pulling this kind of strong-handed business that we're used to from them.
But the thing to remember is that M$ is just a company and all they want to do is make money. Despite the best intentions and the sweet words that BG says on TV, they don't really care about innovation. So, rather than moving the capabilities of the Web forward, they are making their own advancements and forcing others to come along with them.
Maybe Supreme Court intervention will make a difference, but I'm not counting on it.