Worse, actually. I saw a number of drivers watching for non-verbal cues from the passenger. So instead of looking at the road driver keeps on turning his head to the passenger (either to see the reaction or to reply to one's face). Which is not the case with hands free with the cellphone. Plus, when situation gets worse passenger usually can't produce anything more useful than "AAH! LOOK OUT!", which only adds to driver's panic braking, even if acceleration would help instead(I suppose there are individuals that will say calmly "car on the left changes lanes" instead of something useless and alarming but I haven't seen any:) ) That's why many buses have that little sign that says "Do not distract driver". But while it's easy to stop and fine someone for having a cellphone in one's hand it's way more difficult to fine and shut up a passenger. So, instead of solving the real problem, a "seemingly logical" solution is applied, that in reality is not going nearly enough.
Funny but your comment seems to be a typical response from anti-SPAM vigilante that prefers to blacklist everything, no matter what the real situation is. I included in the article link to black list of Google mail relays. Would you like your Google mail be blocked because someone claims that Google is a safe haven for spammers as it "either sent mail to our spam traps or we received reports from our members of spam"? Oh, I forgot. You work for an ISP so you don't care. But it would be interesting to see your reaction if your whole subnet gets blocked because ISP on the adjacent net got flagged as "does not react to SPAM reports" and block list would escalate original listing to a bigger subnet. I am sure you have enough time and money to quickly move to another upstream provider in a blink of an eye. Or somehow magically clean up your particular subnet over typical "Oh, but you're too close to spammers, you must be spammer yourself!" battle cry.
This particular article was about GoDaddy relying on Spamhouse for deciding what accounts to block until $50/$199 fee is paid. There are tons of discussions about black list reliability and false positives. Primary difference with spam flagging/blocking is users chose to do it. But here someone else made the decision and demanded payment.
Would you like Google.com to suddenly disappear from the DNS because Spamhaus flagged some of their IPs as "sending spam"? I am sure you would.
When list contains false posisitves I call that "unreliable". In this case GoDaddy "relies" (or uses list as an excuse) to demand extra money from domain owners. I so wish Google would open its own registrar.
Yes, and I will say it once again. I hope history will repeat itself. Just like when big telcos got what they asked for -- payments for termination of calls from other providers on their networks. They hoped for big fat profit, as most people would want to call someone who has local service from Bell and thus "alternative" provider would pay Bell for the right to send calls to their network. Except then there was a bunch of tiny providers who gave ISPs phone numbers next to nothing. And they got paid by Bells because Bells' customers wanted to dial into those numbers to connect to the Internet. Now, if telcos will get their way and there will be "extra expensive fast lane" for data, I so hope Level 3 will charge Telcos through their noses for accessing all content servers that live on Level 3. And they will pay to Google, or their users will get the slow treatment. There will be a splash of Telcos' howling about how "this wasn't what they intended and we need to make things right" and everything will level itself off, more or less. Perhaps Google Internet will be available for some too;)
I wonder why all this new hype is not called BBS 2.0 ? I mean it's the same idea -- microcontent posted by participants of particular service (be it pictures, stories, daily updates), just done through the browser. Yes, it's easier to ask for money for snazzy new abbreviation, and it improves feeling of self-worthieness. "We need to improve our Wiki presence in Web 2.0 and expand RSS feeds to all departments" sounds so much better than "Our documentation should be easy to use and all departments have to post their news on the web regularly". And probably would get a budget. *sigh* Nothing but hype
English only, so won't overpower other engines
on
Ask.com's Rising Star
·
· Score: 1
I don't know why Ask.com decided to only allow searches in English but... an attempt to search in Ask.com would provide exactly zero rezults, versus about 10 000 in Google Search or 600 in A9 (basically MSN search). Yes, English-speaking users in US and Europe are valuable in terms of potential "click-revenue" but cutting out everyone else is, IMHO, bad policy (and Ask.com won't let you look up in Kanji either: this has one "sponsored click-link" versus 100 000 000 results from google with same sponsored link:) ). That's why I don't believe in this "Ask.com will move up in ranks like crazy!" PR stuff. Ask will remain a small engine for very limited use, while other engines will grow along with non-English internet. Now they can be profitable at being small, but there is no significant growth prospect. And Wall Street loves mega-growth prospect...
1. It's T-Mobile UK, not T-Mobile USA. Not yet, anyways. Web browsing with 3G speeds for 20 pounds a month? Goodluck finding that:) (eventually it probably will be available from T-Mobile USA but not yet) 2. It's a business plan. If you look at a regular "non-professional" plan then you'll notice that even more restrictive full fineprint says:
Minimum term contact and credit check applies. Compatible handset required. Fair use policy applies: Relax + web 'n' walk and Flext + web 'n' walk price plans provide unlimited internet surfing on mobile handsets in the UK. To ensure a high quality of service for all our customers, they are not to be used for other activities such as (but not limited to): modem access for computers, internet based video/audio streaming services, peer to peer file sharing, internet based video download and internet based telephony. If such use is detected, notice may be given, after which network protection controls may be applied which will result in a reduced speed of transmission.
(emp. mine). Professional plan says nothing about "modem access for computers" (VPN) or downloads and such. Given how much talking on the phone costs in UK I'd say it's very clear why they don't want to allow VOIP. Texting is not that expensive but still provides a nice revenue.
It's simply logical. Customer already signed contract and bought the phone. Pissing customer off, while may be fun and normal for Bell companies, does not add extra bonus points. A simple call to the T-Mobile customer support would do -- they will give you unlock code in a couple days and help you with instructions on how to perform unlocking. After which you can use your phone in Europe. With all of your favorite ringtones and things...
Which is exactly why, say, DowJones owned Marketwatch publishes "brilliant" pieces on how companies have to borrow money instead of having money in cash -- with Google and Microsoft being given as "prime examples of wrongdoing". Yes, in some cases leasing something short term is better than owning them, but no, with money it's better having them in the bank, rather than giving into public's cry "give us all your money reserves NOW! We own your stock!", after which a swift selloff will follow because company does not have enough cash for developing new product or not allowed to borrow more because something new is not "a sure hit" and they may loose money on it in the future. Wall Street is being run by fear, greed and herding instinct, so every time someone gives off those "Well you don't have to blindly follow advice of your [commission-paid] broker and [seemingly independent bank] analyst, you have to think for yourself" vibes, they get extremely unhappy. Why, next thing you know companies won't need to borrow cash just to survive, and won't depend on rating agencies "reviewing" their prospects. Microsoft and Google may antipodes in end user treatment, but both companies do what's good for them in the long run -- trying not to get too distracted by whines of people who are getting a free ride.
Why can't they just send a nice little letter to their subscribers at AOL, saying that due to company policy users with AOL accounts will have to change their email, as they will stop trying to send their newsletters to AOL? And add a check in subscription form that will politely inform user why her/his AOL account is not good for receiving mail...
I tried GIMP. I spit four thousand times and I went back to Photoshop. Yes, interface is customizable and simply takes "getting used to" but I don't want to customize nor get used to it, all I wanted was to make a small animated toolbar (which I did in less than 10 minutes at home). Why can't there be a version that does things like Photoshop does? I think GIMP is in the same UI trap as Lotus products that are trailing Microsoft Office popularity -- "We're different, and we don't care that more popular product has different interface, we'll force users to get used to ours". Yes, there will be perver strange people who will say they like Lotus UI because "it's different" but for most people Microsoft Office interface works, and Microsoft got where it is now not only because of the monopoly tie-in with OS products, but because they copy good things into their products, including UI. By being "different" Lotus office products limited themselves to situation where user is forced to use them. And for home they run for Word or for something that looks and behaves like Word. Every time you encounter radically new interface it takes time and effort to get used to. People don't want and don't have to do it. Leave the radical and ugly dysfunctional interface to hobbyists, and copy Photoshop interface for the rest of users. If you want to make a point how easier/better GIMP interface is, add a little window that says "You could have easily done it in GIMP native interface by pressing blah blah blah". And, perhaps, allow pieces of interface being switch to native mode, so once user is completely accustomed to GIMP way of doing things whole interface would be reverted to radical mode. Instead of that all I see is people argue with foam at their mouth on how much better GIMP interface is.
This will happen sooner or [a bit] later. Perhaps even with pretense for National Security. Say, if you're "qualified customer" then you live on a nice fast network. And if you're "untrusted" (read "cheap") you live on "general purpose network" that has latency and jitter issues due to "traffic monitoring to assist national security matters". At which point I would really start rooting for Google buying dark fiber all over and trying to throw together some sort of network. Even if not everywhere, it'd be enough to disrupt major evil plot.
Click to Call gives you way more control than otherwise possible through 800 number. For example: you already know which product customer wants. Because you know the context. So no more "For electronics, press or say One, for fish food, press or say Two, for orchids and discontinued flowers, press or say Three". You can similarly omit language preferences. You don't have to use same 800 number with complicated routing (you don't need to lease/buy/use multiple 800 numbers). You can integrate it directly with your call center functions and CRM. And it's CHEAPER. Outgoing calls will be made from the best location (when you have local presence, from local numbers etc). I'd say that is worth the complication:)
If these filters really work, wouldn't US carriers love to have them? Especially if there will be no enforcement of carrier neutrality? You get to use your network AND block activities that reduce your revenue in other wings of the business...
Now imagine Google Video getting subscription to every cable/satellite channel it can get (probably also from Canada, Japan and some other countries), recording it all in HDTV resolution and Dolby Digital sounds, and serving it up through the internet for a small fee (well.. compared to full cable that is). Content is distributed via Akamai and Partners, so it's always fast. For a few extra ads before show starts you get extra $10 off a month. And those are nice and relevant ads (I am ok with that, in fact I ofter rewind cool ads and watch them again). And you don't need to buy a box. No need to have a clear view of the southern skies. No need for $75 a month cable package just because the channel you love doesn't come in Basic cable. No need to think whether you pre-programmed all shows you want to be recorded. No need to think about recording conflicts (each TV channel thinks it's the pinnacle of human artistic creativity and tries to push shows at the same time "competitors" do). No need to worry about missing interesting stuff -- because your preference block is finely tuned and known to Google via your watching browsing and emailing habits.
How about that? Would you sign up for this service? I am waiting...
Given that Jodie Foster movie beat "the number one highest movie of all time" at the box office I get serious reservations about it. Along with an image of thousands of fans, sitting with a mouse in each hand, clicking nervously: "It has to be number one... at least in this poll!"
Frankly given financial outcome there probably will be Serenity 2, and even 3. Measly budget practically guarantees it'll earn a bit of money (even with 50+% drop in ticket sales this weekend it'll be up to almost 20 millions) by the time DVD is released (and then Uber DVD Version, with Collector's edition, Platinum edition, Director's Special Cut, Mega Pack and a few other practically identical revisions):)
There's a big NASA chunk of land in Houston. And I am sure local government would not object of a bunch of people with BIG income to move into the area. After all, if pension fund is so screwed up, probably other locally provided services too (and overpriced)
One simple reason. The more browsers there are, the more work for web developers. "If you do it according to standard it'll work everywhere" is bullshit. Because each "standard compliant" browser has its own cockroaches in its head. Things that work inconsistently between different versions. Things that got "fixed" only in new revisions and someone use old one etc. So, the more browsers wrestle for its share of the statistics pie, the more headaches there are for support and development. "You'd better squash them while they're still small" works the best. Even though in this case "squash" means "remove from consideration". If someone wants to use "alternative" browser -- fine. If that person calls support line and starts bitching about something that works in all other major browsers -- tough luck.
What I don't understand is why he even bothered with this type of activity. Given a mountain of knowledge about Tivos, including partitions and OS dissection on the net, why not build on that? Simple search is not good enough? What's going to be next, "our expert have dissected a frog and found out this squishy part to be its stomach! Hooray!" published in medical magazines?
And some small or no-name brand from China, that does not bother with all "checks and balances" (gasp!) suddenly enjoys quadruple sales. Of course the funniest thing will be that same factory produces "big name" playes during morning shift:) Philips players in retaliation will have well-known code (flap the door of the player three times, tap on the side panel and say "please let me watch in digital format" three times) that will turn off protection. Easy:)
Well, they decided they did not want any of the (minimally) resourceful and curious students to be admitted. Great. If I have an opportunity to hire people, I will go for those kids rather than Stanford graduates. Innovative and curious minds are always better than slowpokes that truly believe it's ethical for higher education entity NOT to tell them whether they're admitted even though decision has been already made, and only reason for that is they wouldn't be able to say "Yes" to another college in case they were not.
Slashdot Mirror
Worse, actually. I saw a number of drivers watching for non-verbal cues from the passenger. So instead of looking at the road driver keeps on turning his head to the passenger (either to see the reaction or to reply to one's face). Which is not the case with hands free with the cellphone. :) )
Plus, when situation gets worse passenger usually can't produce anything more useful than "AAH! LOOK OUT!", which only adds to driver's panic braking, even if acceleration would help instead(I suppose there are individuals that will say calmly "car on the left changes lanes" instead of something useless and alarming but I haven't seen any
That's why many buses have that little sign that says "Do not distract driver". But while it's easy to stop and fine someone for having a cellphone in one's hand it's way more difficult to fine and shut up a passenger.
So, instead of solving the real problem, a "seemingly logical" solution is applied, that in reality is not going nearly enough.
So you're saying there is a company that specializes in transferring photos from one service to another?
Funny but your comment seems to be a typical response from anti-SPAM vigilante that prefers to blacklist everything, no matter what the real situation is.
I included in the article link to black list of Google mail relays. Would you like your Google mail be blocked because someone claims that Google is a safe haven for spammers as it "either sent mail to our spam traps or we received reports from our members of spam"?
Oh, I forgot. You work for an ISP so you don't care. But it would be interesting to see your reaction if your whole subnet gets blocked because ISP on the adjacent net got flagged as "does not react to SPAM reports" and block list would escalate original listing to a bigger subnet. I am sure you have enough time and money to quickly move to another upstream provider in a blink of an eye. Or somehow magically clean up your particular subnet over typical "Oh, but you're too close to spammers, you must be spammer yourself!" battle cry.
This particular article was about GoDaddy relying on Spamhouse for deciding what accounts to block until $50/$199 fee is paid. There are tons of discussions about black list reliability and false positives. Primary difference with spam flagging/blocking is users chose to do it. But here someone else made the decision and demanded payment.
Would you like Google.com to suddenly disappear from the DNS because Spamhaus flagged some of their IPs as "sending spam"? I am sure you would.
When list contains false posisitves I call that "unreliable". In this case GoDaddy "relies" (or uses list as an excuse) to demand extra money from domain owners.
I so wish Google would open its own registrar.
Yes, and I will say it once again. I hope history will repeat itself. Just like when big telcos got what they asked for -- payments for termination of calls from other providers on their networks. They hoped for big fat profit, as most people would want to call someone who has local service from Bell and thus "alternative" provider would pay Bell for the right to send calls to their network. Except then there was a bunch of tiny providers who gave ISPs phone numbers next to nothing. And they got paid by Bells because Bells' customers wanted to dial into those numbers to connect to the Internet. ;)
Now, if telcos will get their way and there will be "extra expensive fast lane" for data, I so hope Level 3 will charge Telcos through their noses for accessing all content servers that live on Level 3. And they will pay to Google, or their users will get the slow treatment.
There will be a splash of Telcos' howling about how "this wasn't what they intended and we need to make things right" and everything will level itself off, more or less.
Perhaps Google Internet will be available for some too
I wonder why all this new hype is not called BBS 2.0 ?
I mean it's the same idea -- microcontent posted by participants of particular service (be it pictures, stories, daily updates), just done through the browser. Yes, it's easier to ask for money for snazzy new abbreviation, and it improves feeling of self-worthieness.
"We need to improve our Wiki presence in Web 2.0 and expand RSS feeds to all departments" sounds so much better than "Our documentation should be easy to use and all departments have to post their news on the web regularly". And probably would get a budget.
*sigh* Nothing but hype
I don't know why Ask.com decided to only allow searches in English but... an attempt to search in Ask.com would provide exactly zero rezults, versus about 10 000 in Google Search or 600 in A9 (basically MSN search). :) ). That's why I don't believe in this "Ask.com will move up in ranks like crazy!" PR stuff. Ask will remain a small engine for very limited use, while other engines will grow along with non-English internet. Now they can be profitable at being small, but there is no significant growth prospect. And Wall Street loves mega-growth prospect...
Yes, English-speaking users in US and Europe are valuable in terms of potential "click-revenue" but cutting out everyone else is, IMHO, bad policy (and Ask.com won't let you look up in Kanji either: this has one "sponsored click-link" versus 100 000 000 results from google with same sponsored link
2. It's a business plan. If you look at a regular "non-professional" plan then you'll notice that even more restrictive full fineprint says:
(emp. mine). Professional plan says nothing about "modem access for computers" (VPN) or downloads and such.
Given how much talking on the phone costs in UK I'd say it's very clear why they don't want to allow VOIP. Texting is not that expensive but still provides a nice revenue.
It's my computer ;) I can play against Tiger Woods any time, and 5 kilobucks computer can do way more than track golf balls :)
It's simply logical. Customer already signed contract and bought the phone. Pissing customer off, while may be fun and normal for Bell companies, does not add extra bonus points. A simple call to the T-Mobile customer support would do -- they will give you unlock code in a couple days and help you with instructions on how to perform unlocking.
After which you can use your phone in Europe. With all of your favorite ringtones and things...
Which is exactly why, say, DowJones owned Marketwatch publishes "brilliant" pieces on how companies have to borrow money instead of having money in cash -- with Google and Microsoft being given as "prime examples of wrongdoing". Yes, in some cases leasing something short term is better than owning them, but no, with money it's better having them in the bank, rather than giving into public's cry "give us all your money reserves NOW! We own your stock!", after which a swift selloff will follow because company does not have enough cash for developing new product or not allowed to borrow more because something new is not "a sure hit" and they may loose money on it in the future.
Wall Street is being run by fear, greed and herding instinct, so every time someone gives off those "Well you don't have to blindly follow advice of your [commission-paid] broker and [seemingly independent bank] analyst, you have to think for yourself" vibes, they get extremely unhappy. Why, next thing you know companies won't need to borrow cash just to survive, and won't depend on rating agencies "reviewing" their prospects.
Microsoft and Google may antipodes in end user treatment, but both companies do what's good for them in the long run -- trying not to get too distracted by whines of people who are getting a free ride.
Why can't they just send a nice little letter to their subscribers at AOL, saying that due to company policy users with AOL accounts will have to change their email, as they will stop trying to send their newsletters to AOL? And add a check in subscription form that will politely inform user why her/his AOL account is not good for receiving mail...
I tried GIMP. I spit four thousand times and I went back to Photoshop. Yes, interface is customizable and simply takes "getting used to" but I don't want to customize nor get used to it, all I wanted was to make a small animated toolbar (which I did in less than 10 minutes at home). Why can't there be a version that does things like Photoshop does?
I think GIMP is in the same UI trap as Lotus products that are trailing Microsoft Office popularity -- "We're different, and we don't care that more popular product has different interface, we'll force users to get used to ours". Yes, there will be perver strange people who will say they like Lotus UI because "it's different" but for most people Microsoft Office interface works, and Microsoft got where it is now not only because of the monopoly tie-in with OS products, but because they copy good things into their products, including UI. By being "different" Lotus office products limited themselves to situation where user is forced to use them. And for home they run for Word or for something that looks and behaves like Word.
Every time you encounter radically new interface it takes time and effort to get used to. People don't want and don't have to do it. Leave the radical and ugly dysfunctional interface to hobbyists, and copy Photoshop interface for the rest of users. If you want to make a point how easier/better GIMP interface is, add a little window that says "You could have easily done it in GIMP native interface by pressing blah blah blah". And, perhaps, allow pieces of interface being switch to native mode, so once user is completely accustomed to GIMP way of doing things whole interface would be reverted to radical mode.
Instead of that all I see is people argue with foam at their mouth on how much better GIMP interface is.
Adding "standard" means of tracking clicks would be very good for users that love privacy. One -- they can disable it (settings/plug-in/etc). Two -- companies that make firewall/filter products will include neat little option "remove PING from links" and kill ping attribute from tags (and pieces of javascript that would try to set it). :)
Of course, precisely because of all of the above it probably won't take off. And making ping support mandatory would result in even bigger collective gasp and "They're taking after Big Evil Corporations" accusations
This will happen sooner or [a bit] later. Perhaps even with pretense for National Security. Say, if you're "qualified customer" then you live on a nice fast network. And if you're "untrusted" (read "cheap") you live on "general purpose network" that has latency and jitter issues due to "traffic monitoring to assist national security matters".
At which point I would really start rooting for Google buying dark fiber all over and trying to throw together some sort of network. Even if not everywhere, it'd be enough to disrupt major evil plot.
Click to Call gives you way more control than otherwise possible through 800 number. :)
For example: you already know which product customer wants. Because you know the context. So no more "For electronics, press or say One, for fish food, press or say Two, for orchids and discontinued flowers, press or say Three". You can similarly omit language preferences. You don't have to use same 800 number with complicated routing (you don't need to lease/buy/use multiple 800 numbers). You can integrate it directly with your call center functions and CRM. And it's CHEAPER. Outgoing calls will be made from the best location (when you have local presence, from local numbers etc).
I'd say that is worth the complication
If these filters really work, wouldn't US carriers love to have them? Especially if there will be no enforcement of carrier neutrality? You get to use your network AND block activities that reduce your revenue in other wings of the business...
Now imagine Google Video getting subscription to every cable/satellite channel it can get (probably also from Canada, Japan and some other countries), recording it all in HDTV resolution and Dolby Digital sounds, and serving it up through the internet for a small fee (well.. compared to full cable that is). Content is distributed via Akamai and Partners, so it's always fast. For a few extra ads before show starts you get extra $10 off a month.
And those are nice and relevant ads (I am ok with that, in fact I ofter rewind cool ads and watch them again). And you don't need to buy a box. No need to have a clear view of the southern skies. No need for $75 a month cable package just because the channel you love doesn't come in Basic cable. No need to think whether you pre-programmed all shows you want to be recorded. No need to think about recording conflicts (each TV channel thinks it's the pinnacle of human artistic creativity and tries to push shows at the same time "competitors" do). No need to worry about missing interesting stuff -- because your preference block is finely tuned and known to Google via your watching browsing and emailing habits.
How about that?
Would you sign up for this service? I am waiting...
Given that Jodie Foster movie beat "the number one highest movie of all time" at the box office I get serious reservations about it. Along with an image of thousands of fans, sitting with a mouse in each hand, clicking nervously: "It has to be number one... at least in this poll!"
:)
Frankly given financial outcome there probably will be Serenity 2, and even 3. Measly budget practically guarantees it'll earn a bit of money (even with 50+% drop in ticket sales this weekend it'll be up to almost 20 millions) by the time DVD is released (and then Uber DVD Version, with Collector's edition, Platinum edition, Director's Special Cut, Mega Pack and a few other practically identical revisions)
There's a big NASA chunk of land in Houston. And I am sure local government would not object of a bunch of people with BIG income to move into the area. After all, if pension fund is so screwed up, probably other locally provided services too (and overpriced)
One simple reason. The more browsers there are, the more work for web developers. "If you do it according to standard it'll work everywhere" is bullshit. Because each "standard compliant" browser has its own cockroaches in its head. Things that work inconsistently between different versions. Things that got "fixed" only in new revisions and someone use old one etc. So, the more browsers wrestle for its share of the statistics pie, the more headaches there are for support and development.
"You'd better squash them while they're still small" works the best. Even though in this case "squash" means "remove from consideration". If someone wants to use "alternative" browser -- fine. If that person calls support line and starts bitching about something that works in all other major browsers -- tough luck.
What I don't understand is why he even bothered with this type of activity. Given a mountain of knowledge about Tivos, including partitions and OS dissection on the net, why not build on that? Simple search is not good enough? What's going to be next, "our expert have dissected a frog and found out this squishy part to be its stomach! Hooray!" published in medical magazines?
And some small or no-name brand from China, that does not bother with all "checks and balances" (gasp!) suddenly enjoys quadruple sales. :) Philips players in retaliation will have well-known code (flap the door of the player three times, tap on the side panel and say "please let me watch in digital format" three times) that will turn off protection. :)
Of course the funniest thing will be that same factory produces "big name" playes during morning shift
Easy
I suppose Transmeta's technologies will come in handy. Like they say :)
Well, they decided they did not want any of the (minimally) resourceful and curious students to be admitted. Great.
If I have an opportunity to hire people, I will go for those kids rather than Stanford graduates. Innovative and curious minds are always better than slowpokes that truly believe it's ethical for higher education entity NOT to tell them whether they're admitted even though decision has been already made, and only reason for that is they wouldn't be able to say "Yes" to another college in case they were not.