Yes, you can also use the clibboard on top of a desk, but that's not the idea- the idea is mobility.
Or...you can use the clipboard. It accepts handwriting input with 100% efficiency and no interpretation errors. It doesn't use any batteries, costs pennies on the dollar, is lighter, and the media is capable of lasting (in usable form) for literally 100s if not 1000s of years.
Is there really much point to installing linux on one of these things yet as there is absolutely no linux handwriting recognition app that could make the most useful part of it (the pen) actually, well, useful?
Depending on how these evolve, I may go for one once the price comes down commensurate with its real capabilities (it is less capable than a decent laptop but costs more). I would love to be able to slap a linux distro (any distro) on it if/when it could take advantage of the pen and handwriting rec.
I'm not holding my breath on that last bit though. This is just not an area where I see open source coming through.
Of course. You should keep your back straight (posture!) and do not flip your wrist. Yes, yes, you may do a "better" job with a bent wrist but you are asking for RSI. Straighten your wrist, straighten your back, and you and your monkey will do fine even. Err, with regards to RSI. Can't do anything about the acquired blindness.
Re:They're going to feed us what??
on
Tornado in a Can
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You HAVE eaten hotdogs haven't you? Same difference.
I know about mesh networks, etc. Still wont work as a replacement of the internet. Say you want to send an email to your Aunt Martha in California and you live in Florida. You need to tap into the internet somewhere and that somewhere connection is costing someone money.
Wifi mesh networks don't apply to rural areas and will only be possible in cities on limited scales (HUGE cities ala NY with buttloads of big buildings all over the place blocking signals, etc). Even then, with every small to large town "meshed" via wireless...you are still leaving out the more rural users AND you are localized to your own geographical area. Want to see a webpage based in France from your "free" wifi network in Newark? Can't because wifi wont go over the Atlantic. You want to email your friend in Britain? Can't because wifi wont cross the Atlantic. Somewhere, sometime, a paid for internet connection is necessary to get connectivity beyond your very local area. The utopian dream of a wireless wifi-based nationwide/worldwide network is just that, a dream of with no reality, no chance. It is nice to have local wifi networks to tap into but it isn't a replacement for the backbone of the internet which costs money to tap into. Companies don't just give away their bandwidth and allow any and all to use their connection. Telcos don't, cable and satellite operators don't and wont and can't. Someone is paying for the penultimate internet connection somewhere...or all you have is a limited peer-to-peer wifi network with retarded personal web pages on it.
I still don't see it. Where is this free wireless networking? SOMEONE is paying the fees needed to tap into the internet backbone. Someone is paying DSL charges, cable access, satellite access or T1 fees somewhere. The only reason the rest are getting it free is because these someone's can presently AFFORD to give away parts of the bandwidth that they ARE paying for. No one. NO ONE. Gets a free tie-in to the internet backbone. One way or another, somewhere, money is changing hands to permit an internet access node to ACCESS the internet which is generously (for now, while they can afford it) handed out to any and sundry who wirelessly connect through their generosity. A few of those internet access point individuals lose their job or take a pay cut and it will have to be goodbye freebie.
So...quit calling it free wireless access. It may be PRESENTLY free to most people (or it may be covered by taxes if a municipality sets it up - which means you are paying for it) but there is payment needed to gain access to the internet. No getting around it. Pseudo-free is more accurate.
What possible reason is there to still run version 5.2? I doubt (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are still running kernel 2.0.4 or whatever was supplied then. At what point does your linux install stop being an old (but stable) "dinosaur" and a new(er) version? New(er) kernel? A switch to a more recent glibc?
And you will see the biggest unrealistic caveat: the study assumed no upgrades over a span of 5 years! M$ tries to force an upgrade just about every frickin' year or so. It is unrealistic to think a company will have the same windoze running 5 years down the line with M$ breathing down their neck AND M$ dropping support for their 5 year old OS after a mere 3 or so.
Another interesting and true point is that those people you hire to administer a linux system setup are more knowledgeable, period, than the MSCE admins for doze so that when something really goes south (on windoze almost anything beyond people forgetting their passwords) the windoze admins are useless while the *nix geniuses can easily whip out a fix - probably without terminating network connectivity while they do it.
An M$-funded study is the same thing as a "study" produced by the M$ marketing department and has the same legitimacy.
how many other countries, some developed, some developing, have high-speed rail or are developing high-speed rail while the US lays back and sticks with environmentally unfriendly transit (SUVs for everything from a drive down the block to the 7Eleven for a bottle of milk to single passenger driving to work).
Someday we in the US will be finally embarrassed into the modern world and take up better means of transport. Perhaps when Afghanistan has high-speed rail the US will follow suite.
After playing with them and being amazed for about 30 minutes, all I could really think though was 'novelty'. They didn't enhance game play in any way, and it actually took relearning some of my trained reactions in quake3.
How does the use of 3-d glasses alter your use of cheats?
Screw the "estate". That is Newspeak for spoiled brat kids living large off someone else's creativity, lacking their own. When the author/originator goes, so goes the copyright (Maximum...and not automatic - the onus for extensions beyond, say 20 years, should definitely be on the creator). Period. His/her children can go to school and get their own frickin jobs and create their own works.
If they lack talent, then tough, the don't get to suck off the teat for perpetuity. Company copyrights should be limited to 20 years with a large $$ cost involved in extending for a max of another 10 years and no more.
What is also nonsensical about the singularity idea is it divorces scientific advancement from those responsible for producing it: humans. There is not an exponentially increasing number of scientists to keep up with the supposedly exponentially increasing level of tech and knowledge. You CAN'T get the amount of scientific advancement in a day that you get in a year unless there is a corresponding increase in the number of scientists doing the work AND they give up on the workday and go hellbent 24/7.
Naw. Science advances only as quickly as humans can do the grunt work. The rate of advancement has a rate wall that cannot be exceeded dependent on 1) number of scientists in each field, 2) the rate they can ingest and gain understanding of other's works and actually process the information into something useable - the larger the body of work, the longer it takes to reach understanding because there is so much more to take in), 3) productive hours in a day, 4) funding (science isn't free - it gets more and more expensive all the time, depending on the area).
I'm certain I'm leaving things out but science doesn't do itself. It is a human activity limited by the limits of the tool conducting it.
Now that you brought it up...our justice system is CRAP. It isn't about truth, it is about the APPEARANCE of truth and trickery. It is all about manipulating individuals rather than presenting the facts (ALL the facts) and letting the conclusion practically make itself.
In a correct and better justice system, there wouldn't be a prosecuter and a defense mutually trying to nail the accused regardless of FACTS or save the accused regardless of FACTS. Also, valid, real FACTS would not be tossed out, ever.
If police come by facts in an unacceptable manner, don't punish society by tossing the data out, punish those who collected the data in an unacceptable manner, from the Police Commish down to the officers. Make it a PERSONAL interest for them to not act inappropriately. As it is in the US, a person who clearly murdered someone could get off free because of a police evidence collection mistake, regardless of the FACT that the evidence clearly proves (scientifically speaking) that the individual did it. No. Not acceptable. You punish the victims family and society for a mistake of a few specific individuals. KEEP the evidence but punish those who collected it.
Next, the lawyers should be scientifically trained and be objective. The court should consider the available data and make a conclusion based ONLY on that and not allow showmanship, histrionics, spurious arguments, etc, to cloud what is a simple question: did the person here do what he/she is accused of doing? It should NOT be based on whether the defense or prosecution put on a better show.
Scientific questions aren't answered on the basis of grandstanding, showmanship, and subjective nonsense above all else. A conclusion stands or falls on the evidence/data. ALL the available data. Simply because a bit of otherwise valid data was collected in an unConstitutional manner doesn't make it magically turn into invalid data. It is what it is. The unConstitutional part is merely a play on emotion and things totally unrelated to whether the accused did what he is accused of doing. It should be addressed in a different manner and forum (nail the police investigators, the department, etc).
I am not a computer "scientist" nor economist, blah, blah, so I am not one to actually DO such a study but...though I use and love Linux, I absolutely could be objective. Howso? I am a SCIENTIST. I only give a crap about reality. It doesn't matter what my personal conceits or preferences, if the data doesn't support my personal preference for the answer, then that is that. One MUST accept reality. I would be quite happy on several levels if the result did favor my personal biases and preferences, iceing on the cake, but I am certainly capable of conducting an OBJECTIVE study no matter my biases.
The data is the data, the results the results, it doesn't matter one way or another if they are to my liking or not, they would be reality. They would be fact.
If I can do it, then anyone else can do it too. But this panel isn't setup to be this way. It is setup for partisans pushing partisan agendas with no desire for a true and faithful study.
you just wait. It wont be long before this device (and others like it...onstar, etc) are MANDATORY in vehicles. This will be tied into the felon Poindexter's Information Awareness computer system so that he and the government can get even tighter spying and tracking of the movements and lives of all Americans.
As useful as something like this can be, it can also be abused (and already has been, ie, ticketing rental car users for speeding as a result of tracking their movements via GPS). These services/devices will be perverted into another spying/privacy violating tool for Poindexter, the Republicans, and any two-bit dictator wannabe that they put into official positions of power.
Ya'll do NOT get it. The panel shouldn't contain OSS partisans NOR M$ lackeys. It should contain ONLY individuals capable of running an OBJECTIVE study one way or another. All you get with this nonsense are two opposing sides calling each other names (metaphorically speaking). It is a foregone conclusion that the OSS people will push the great benefits of OSS while the M$ clown will spout how great M$-crap is, blah, blah. No objectivity anywhere to be seen.
An objective panel made up of objective individuals who run a faithful study on total costs, and benefits, top to bottom, money-wise and moral/political/freedom-wise.
No. To be OBJECTIVE does NOT mean what you think it means. You cannot have individuals with a known bias on the panel and call it an objective or reasonable "study". It is already known a priori what "conclusion" the M$ rep will have. It would be just as bogus to have Stallman on the panel.
If you want the panel to come to a reasonable conclusion, then its members must be objective, period. An M$ rep is not objective. This panel is not looking for a real answer, it is looking for India-style "gifts" (that cost big in the not-so-long-run) from M$.
If they truly wanted an objective study, they would have brought in analysts who don't actually give a damn one way or another, but will actually run an objective study without having an inkling as to the way it is "supposed" to come out (in favor of M$ in this case because that is the only reason to include such a person).
You CANNOT have an objective look at the scientific evidence supporting the fact of evolution by including creationists. You cannot have an objective study on whether it is cost effective and good policy in general to use OSS with M$ reps on the "objective" panel.
Americans ARE stupid. They support Homeland Security which means destruction of basic "American" civil liberties. They think that freedom of speech goes too far. They don't give a damn about DMCA and related things that directly affects them. They ARE lazy and stupid. Bovine, as an adjective, or a load of sheep also applies.
Lazy, idiotic, fat bovines...to a overweight man/woman.
Do you realise that the nonfat American population is the MINORITY? The US is THE fattest nation in the world. It is irrelevant that 10% of the population is actually healthy or exercises. The vast majority, and thus the majority of those who will purchase such things as the Segway, are overweight. Their kids are overweight too (it IS a problem of epidemic proportions in the USofA) and will not be helped when daddy warbucks shells out 4 grand to buy their portly kid a segway.
In America, 250 lbs almost always means tremendously fat. Australia, so I read, is hellbent on matching America as the lardo center of the world but they have a lot of catching up to do.
In any case, the sidewalk is not the place for this, anymore than it is a place for bicycles, motor scooters, etc. Everyone would be better off with more walking or bike riding and less driving or Segging. Thin people will BECOME fat as their last bit of exercise (walking) goes out in favor of using their new toy.
Well... I'll file a lawsuit against both the operator and the city (for allowing it on sidewalks) AFTER I use the toy to beat the sh*t out of the idiot that ran into me or my wife.
Heh. Please wipe off the special McD's sauce from your fingers before operating your computer, you are writing gibberish.
I fully intend to waste my money on an ultralite, not a silly toy meant to make fat, lazy people fatter and lazier.
That clown who devised the segway has a couple of REAL useful inventions, one of which lead to the breech baby segway: a wheelchair capable of going up and down stairs and other useful things. His other invention (still in the works) is a Sterling-engine-driven power generator and water purifier (about the size of a large tower case).
THESE are useful. The seqway is for lazy fat idiots, fat lazy wannabes, or people with more money than sense. The segway is doomed and overhyped. Beat cops and mail deliverers, mark my words. After the first few mega lawsuits due to snotnosed punks or lazy fat asses plowing down Grandma and Grandpa on a sidewalk (or plowing over little Suzy), the segway will be a gonner.
Woo-hoo, a TOY that will get people to avoid even the most basic and simple bit of exercise called WALKING. People, particularly Americans, are pigs and idiots. They hop in their car to drive down the block to get a soda and then drive back home. They eat, eat, eat and sit on their fat, lazy asses and waste money on useless and silly toys.
For Mithras' sake, use your frickin' legs and DO something! Exercise you damn lazy, nasty, flabby lardasses. DON'T buy a segway, WALK. Or ride a bike. If you don't like the seat giving you a wedgy, get a reclining bike.
These toys should be largely relegated to foot patrol cops and mail delivery personnel. Everyone else can walk and burn a few frickin' calories to at least TRY to offset your billion calorie supersized McD's lardass lunch special.
Ya'll make me sick (those itching to have one of these things). Lazy-ass pigs.
Might M$'s "XML" format not be like their "HTML"? I will only believe that they are using XML when it is TRUE XML and not some perverted, extended, M$-adulterated variant of XML.
M$ has never seen a standard that they can properly follow. They ALWAYS pollute their version of the standard to make it nonstandard. Word has it that they are playing to do the same with TCP/IP too, all in the name of "trusted computing".
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, you can also use the clibboard on top of a desk, but that's not the idea- the idea is mobility.
Or...you can use the clipboard. It accepts handwriting input with 100% efficiency and no interpretation errors. It doesn't use any batteries, costs pennies on the dollar, is lighter, and the media is capable of lasting (in usable form) for literally 100s if not 1000s of years.
Can a tablet PC do THAT?! Huh? Thought not.
Is there really much point to installing linux on one of these things yet as there is absolutely no linux handwriting recognition app that could make the most useful part of it (the pen) actually, well, useful?
Depending on how these evolve, I may go for one once the price comes down commensurate with its real capabilities (it is less capable than a decent laptop but costs more). I would love to be able to slap a linux distro (any distro) on it if/when it could take advantage of the pen and handwriting rec.
I'm not holding my breath on that last bit though. This is just not an area where I see open source coming through.
Of course. You should keep your back straight (posture!) and do not flip your wrist. Yes, yes, you may do a "better" job with a bent wrist but you are asking for RSI. Straighten your wrist, straighten your back, and you and your monkey will do fine even. Err, with regards to RSI. Can't do anything about the acquired blindness.
You HAVE eaten hotdogs haven't you? Same difference.
I know about mesh networks, etc. Still wont work as a replacement of the internet. Say you want to send an email to your Aunt Martha in California and you live in Florida. You need to tap into the internet somewhere and that somewhere connection is costing someone money.
Wifi mesh networks don't apply to rural areas and will only be possible in cities on limited scales (HUGE cities ala NY with buttloads of big buildings all over the place blocking signals, etc). Even then, with every small to large town "meshed" via wireless...you are still leaving out the more rural users AND you are localized to your own geographical area. Want to see a webpage based in France from your "free" wifi network in Newark? Can't because wifi wont go over the Atlantic. You want to email your friend in Britain? Can't because wifi wont cross the Atlantic. Somewhere, sometime, a paid for internet connection is necessary to get connectivity beyond your very local area. The utopian dream of a wireless wifi-based nationwide/worldwide network is just that, a dream of with no reality, no chance. It is nice to have local wifi networks to tap into but it isn't a replacement for the backbone of the internet which costs money to tap into. Companies don't just give away their bandwidth and allow any and all to use their connection. Telcos don't, cable and satellite operators don't and wont and can't. Someone is paying for the penultimate internet connection somewhere...or all you have is a limited peer-to-peer wifi network with retarded personal web pages on it.
I still don't see it. Where is this free wireless networking? SOMEONE is paying the fees needed to tap into the internet backbone. Someone is paying DSL charges, cable access, satellite access or T1 fees somewhere. The only reason the rest are getting it free is because these someone's can presently AFFORD to give away parts of the bandwidth that they ARE paying for. No one. NO ONE. Gets a free tie-in to the internet backbone. One way or another, somewhere, money is changing hands to permit an internet access node to ACCESS the internet which is generously (for now, while they can afford it) handed out to any and sundry who wirelessly connect through their generosity. A few of those internet access point individuals lose their job or take a pay cut and it will have to be goodbye freebie.
So...quit calling it free wireless access. It may be PRESENTLY free to most people (or it may be covered by taxes if a municipality sets it up - which means you are paying for it) but there is payment needed to gain access to the internet. No getting around it. Pseudo-free is more accurate.
So...upgrade to a newer version for free.
What possible reason is there to still run version 5.2? I doubt (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are still running kernel 2.0.4 or whatever was supplied then. At what point does your linux install stop being an old (but stable) "dinosaur" and a new(er) version? New(er) kernel? A switch to a more recent glibc?
And you will see the biggest unrealistic caveat: the study assumed no upgrades over a span of 5 years! M$ tries to force an upgrade just about every frickin' year or so. It is unrealistic to think a company will have the same windoze running 5 years down the line with M$ breathing down their neck AND M$ dropping support for their 5 year old OS after a mere 3 or so.
Another interesting and true point is that those people you hire to administer a linux system setup are more knowledgeable, period, than the MSCE admins for doze so that when something really goes south (on windoze almost anything beyond people forgetting their passwords) the windoze admins are useless while the *nix geniuses can easily whip out a fix - probably without terminating network connectivity while they do it.
An M$-funded study is the same thing as a "study" produced by the M$ marketing department and has the same legitimacy.
how many other countries, some developed, some developing, have high-speed rail or are developing high-speed rail while the US lays back and sticks with environmentally unfriendly transit (SUVs for everything from a drive down the block to the 7Eleven for a bottle of milk to single passenger driving to work).
Someday we in the US will be finally embarrassed into the modern world and take up better means of transport. Perhaps when Afghanistan has high-speed rail the US will follow suite.
After playing with them and being amazed for about 30 minutes, all I could really think though was 'novelty'. They didn't enhance game play in any way, and it actually took relearning some of my trained reactions in quake3.
How does the use of 3-d glasses alter your use of cheats?
Screw the "estate". That is Newspeak for spoiled brat kids living large off someone else's creativity, lacking their own. When the author/originator goes, so goes the copyright (Maximum...and not automatic - the onus for extensions beyond, say 20 years, should definitely be on the creator). Period. His/her children can go to school and get their own frickin jobs and create their own works.
If they lack talent, then tough, the don't get to suck off the teat for perpetuity. Company copyrights should be limited to 20 years with a large $$ cost involved in extending for a max of another 10 years and no more.
What is also nonsensical about the singularity idea is it divorces scientific advancement from those responsible for producing it: humans. There is not an exponentially increasing number of scientists to keep up with the supposedly exponentially increasing level of tech and knowledge. You CAN'T get the amount of scientific advancement in a day that you get in a year unless there is a corresponding increase in the number of scientists doing the work AND they give up on the workday and go hellbent 24/7.
Naw. Science advances only as quickly as humans can do the grunt work. The rate of advancement has a rate wall that cannot be exceeded dependent on 1) number of scientists in each field, 2) the rate they can ingest and gain understanding of other's works and actually process the information into something useable - the larger the body of work, the longer it takes to reach understanding because there is so much more to take in), 3) productive hours in a day, 4) funding (science isn't free - it gets more and more expensive all the time, depending on the area).
I'm certain I'm leaving things out but science doesn't do itself. It is a human activity limited by the limits of the tool conducting it.
Now that you brought it up...our justice system is CRAP. It isn't about truth, it is about the APPEARANCE of truth and trickery. It is all about manipulating individuals rather than presenting the facts (ALL the facts) and letting the conclusion practically make itself.
In a correct and better justice system, there wouldn't be a prosecuter and a defense mutually trying to nail the accused regardless of FACTS or save the accused regardless of FACTS. Also, valid, real FACTS would not be tossed out, ever.
If police come by facts in an unacceptable manner, don't punish society by tossing the data out, punish those who collected the data in an unacceptable manner, from the Police Commish down to the officers. Make it a PERSONAL interest for them to not act inappropriately. As it is in the US, a person who clearly murdered someone could get off free because of a police evidence collection mistake, regardless of the FACT that the evidence clearly proves (scientifically speaking) that the individual did it. No. Not acceptable. You punish the victims family and society for a mistake of a few specific individuals. KEEP the evidence but punish those who collected it.
Next, the lawyers should be scientifically trained and be objective. The court should consider the available data and make a conclusion based ONLY on that and not allow showmanship, histrionics, spurious arguments, etc, to cloud what is a simple question: did the person here do what he/she is accused of doing? It should NOT be based on whether the defense or prosecution put on a better show.
Scientific questions aren't answered on the basis of grandstanding, showmanship, and subjective nonsense above all else. A conclusion stands or falls on the evidence/data. ALL the available data. Simply because a bit of otherwise valid data was collected in an unConstitutional manner doesn't make it magically turn into invalid data. It is what it is. The unConstitutional part is merely a play on emotion and things totally unrelated to whether the accused did what he is accused of doing. It should be addressed in a different manner and forum (nail the police investigators, the department, etc).
I am not a computer "scientist" nor economist, blah, blah, so I am not one to actually DO such a study but...though I use and love Linux, I absolutely could be objective. Howso? I am a SCIENTIST. I only give a crap about reality. It doesn't matter what my personal conceits or preferences, if the data doesn't support my personal preference for the answer, then that is that. One MUST accept reality. I would be quite happy on several levels if the result did favor my personal biases and preferences, iceing on the cake, but I am certainly capable of conducting an OBJECTIVE study no matter my biases.
The data is the data, the results the results, it doesn't matter one way or another if they are to my liking or not, they would be reality. They would be fact.
If I can do it, then anyone else can do it too. But this panel isn't setup to be this way. It is setup for partisans pushing partisan agendas with no desire for a true and faithful study.
you just wait. It wont be long before this device (and others like it...onstar, etc) are MANDATORY in vehicles. This will be tied into the felon Poindexter's Information Awareness computer system so that he and the government can get even tighter spying and tracking of the movements and lives of all Americans.
As useful as something like this can be, it can also be abused (and already has been, ie, ticketing rental car users for speeding as a result of tracking their movements via GPS). These services/devices will be perverted into another spying/privacy violating tool for Poindexter, the Republicans, and any two-bit dictator wannabe that they put into official positions of power.
Ya'll do NOT get it. The panel shouldn't contain OSS partisans NOR M$ lackeys. It should contain ONLY individuals capable of running an OBJECTIVE study one way or another. All you get with this nonsense are two opposing sides calling each other names (metaphorically speaking). It is a foregone conclusion that the OSS people will push the great benefits of OSS while the M$ clown will spout how great M$-crap is, blah, blah. No objectivity anywhere to be seen.
An objective panel made up of objective individuals who run a faithful study on total costs, and benefits, top to bottom, money-wise and moral/political/freedom-wise.
Anything else is bullcrap.
No. To be OBJECTIVE does NOT mean what you think it means. You cannot have individuals with a known bias on the panel and call it an objective or reasonable "study". It is already known a priori what "conclusion" the M$ rep will have. It would be just as bogus to have Stallman on the panel.
If you want the panel to come to a reasonable conclusion, then its members must be objective, period. An M$ rep is not objective. This panel is not looking for a real answer, it is looking for India-style "gifts" (that cost big in the not-so-long-run) from M$.
If they truly wanted an objective study, they would have brought in analysts who don't actually give a damn one way or another, but will actually run an objective study without having an inkling as to the way it is "supposed" to come out (in favor of M$ in this case because that is the only reason to include such a person).
You CANNOT have an objective look at the scientific evidence supporting the fact of evolution by including creationists. You cannot have an objective study on whether it is cost effective and good policy in general to use OSS with M$ reps on the "objective" panel.
Does speaking one's mind AND speaking the Truth automatically make one a troll?
This ain't Candyland full of Candyasses who only speak sugar and syrup. This is the real fat world.
Americans ARE stupid. They support Homeland Security which means destruction of basic "American" civil liberties. They think that freedom of speech goes too far. They don't give a damn about DMCA and related things that directly affects them. They ARE lazy and stupid. Bovine, as an adjective, or a load of sheep also applies.
Lazy, idiotic, fat bovines...to a overweight man/woman.
Do you realise that the nonfat American population is the MINORITY? The US is THE fattest nation in the world. It is irrelevant that 10% of the population is actually healthy or exercises. The vast majority, and thus the majority of those who will purchase such things as the Segway, are overweight. Their kids are overweight too (it IS a problem of epidemic proportions in the USofA) and will not be helped when daddy warbucks shells out 4 grand to buy their portly kid a segway.
In America, 250 lbs almost always means tremendously fat. Australia, so I read, is hellbent on matching America as the lardo center of the world but they have a lot of catching up to do.
In any case, the sidewalk is not the place for this, anymore than it is a place for bicycles, motor scooters, etc. Everyone would be better off with more walking or bike riding and less driving or Segging. Thin people will BECOME fat as their last bit of exercise (walking) goes out in favor of using their new toy.
Well... I'll file a lawsuit against both the operator and the city (for allowing it on sidewalks) AFTER I use the toy to beat the sh*t out of the idiot that ran into me or my wife.
Heh. Please wipe off the special McD's sauce from your fingers before operating your computer, you are writing gibberish.
I fully intend to waste my money on an ultralite, not a silly toy meant to make fat, lazy people fatter and lazier.
That clown who devised the segway has a couple of REAL useful inventions, one of which lead to the breech baby segway: a wheelchair capable of going up and down stairs and other useful things. His other invention (still in the works) is a Sterling-engine-driven power generator and water purifier (about the size of a large tower case).
THESE are useful. The seqway is for lazy fat idiots, fat lazy wannabes, or people with more money than sense. The segway is doomed and overhyped. Beat cops and mail deliverers, mark my words. After the first few mega lawsuits due to snotnosed punks or lazy fat asses plowing down Grandma and Grandpa on a sidewalk (or plowing over little Suzy), the segway will be a gonner.
Woo-hoo, a TOY that will get people to avoid even the most basic and simple bit of exercise called WALKING. People, particularly Americans, are pigs and idiots. They hop in their car to drive down the block to get a soda and then drive back home. They eat, eat, eat and sit on their fat, lazy asses and waste money on useless and silly toys.
For Mithras' sake, use your frickin' legs and DO something! Exercise you damn lazy, nasty, flabby lardasses. DON'T buy a segway, WALK. Or ride a bike. If you don't like the seat giving you a wedgy, get a reclining bike.
These toys should be largely relegated to foot patrol cops and mail delivery personnel. Everyone else can walk and burn a few frickin' calories to at least TRY to offset your billion calorie supersized McD's lardass lunch special.
Ya'll make me sick (those itching to have one of these things). Lazy-ass pigs.
Might M$'s "XML" format not be like their "HTML"? I will only believe that they are using XML when it is TRUE XML and not some perverted, extended, M$-adulterated variant of XML.
M$ has never seen a standard that they can properly follow. They ALWAYS pollute their version of the standard to make it nonstandard. Word has it that they are playing to do the same with TCP/IP too, all in the name of "trusted computing".