It's been a while since I read Diamond Age, but wasn't there a human behind the technology?
That aside, I think this is pretty cool tech. I keep waiting for the eye trackers to check interpupillary distance so that focus works within rendered 3D enviros. But this is a nice start. I just hope they remove that awful background music from the production version.
How do the deaths with a suspected link to throttle software stack up statistically to those saved by anti-lock brakes?
On a related note, how does the temperature of the oceans stack up statistically to the price of housing?
How does Toyota safety - on any model you choose - stack up to the competition when measured in deaths per millions of miles? I doubt this problem is even enough to appear in those big-picture statistics.
I doubt that more than 2.125786% of conjectures are anything but wild-ass-guesses.
Most software is nearly -impossible- to test under flawless conditions. Especially embedded systems with small amounts of CPU power and memory.
That's why aircraft software development has extensive procedures that start with requirements all the way through delivery (see: DO-178). Which is also why aircraft critical software bugs are rare (although certainly not unheard of). The automotive manufacturers should be developing to similar standards. Perhaps this incident will put more pressure down that path. It wasn't all that long ago (maybe 15 years or so) that medical software also had no development requirements - they eventually went to something patterned after DO-178b, as I recall. But not before some deaths.
Plus, all this hype around these Toyota acceleration problems is just that, hype.
So... 52 people hyped to death. That might be some kind of record.
Damn. I was planning on getting an iPad with GSM so that I could tether my iPod Touch to it. I'm betting I'm not gonna be able to do that either. Well -- there goes my iPad purchase. And tell Steve J. I said so!!!
Why exactly is there a congressional case going on about this?
Why exactly was there a Congressional investigation into Ford when their Explorers were prone to rollover? Really - heaven forbid Toyota get the same treatment as other automotive manufacturers. No one even said anything when Toyota redesigned their trucks to fix a serious safety issue but didn't bother to recall the trucks with the problem.
If you want to bitch about irrelevant issues, let's ask why the DoJ is threatening to investigate the BCS.
Sounds like you need an annoying dog that insists on standing in front of the electronics rack at the precise moment that you're trying to stop that TiVo fast-forward.:)
I thought this action was interesting. Today I learned that MS did something I agree with via domain locking. Yesterday I learned that MS did something I disagreed with via domain locking (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/24/1939257/Cryptome-in-Hot-Water-Again).
I'm not quite sure how I feel about the totality of this...
If only we were talking about LCI's. Unfortunately, I was responding to this:
The purpose of the sensor is not to detect water. The purpose of the sensor is to give Apple and the insurance company a technical strawman to point to as to why you're not gonna get the warranty replacement you've morally and legally got coming.
"We're not honoring the warranty because the machine says you've been bad," sounds sbetter than "We don't wanna honor your warranty 'cause that would cost us money to live up to our obligations."
The statement by the OP was that the purpose of the sensor wasn't to detect water but was just a plan to avoid warranty claims. My anecdotal response was merely to show that it's not as black & white as (s)he would like to believe. If anything, it would be far cheaper for them to add shock monitoring code to the firmware so that claims like mine could be easily denied.
This is just shattering my whole world view. Today it may be The National InfoQuirer putting out mud-raking stories full of bogus information. But I fear for tomorrow. Who knows, we might even see pillars of objectivity such as kdawson approving stories with the same level of journalistic integrity.
Individual Apple employees don't really give a fuck if Apple has to shell out for a replacement iPhone
Then certainly they don't give a fuck about the LCI either which makes it moot -- at least according to your hypothesis.
I suppose this is where I'm supposed to call you "Angry random internet dude without any actual evidence vs. an actual replacement story.." or something equally childish. But I'll refrain.
I went into an Apple store and got my original iPhone replaced 10 months after buying it because I dropped it two stories onto concrete. It still worked, but it wouldn't take a charge and the main button was constantly pressed. I admitted to the damage vector (it was a bit hard not too -- major scratches and dings on the aluminum). They tested my phone, verified that it wouldn't take a charge, wiped my current phone, swapped the SIM into a new phone, activated it, and sent me on my way.
Perhaps I missed some comments due to my filter settings, but I didn't see anyone directly recommending Discrete Math/Finite Math. That's a pretty important topic -- I did see it sort of mentioned in passing as part of other topics, but having a deep understanding of discrete would help a lot. Boolean logic topics like DeMorgan's theorem & Carnot maps can help you considerably with optimization and even just reviewing the logic portions can help you avoid those "if/else/oops" scenarios wherein you forget to consider one of the cases of a logic statement.
Linear Algebra can also be extremely helpful for a fair number of problems that arise and it can also lead you into linear optimization topics.
Although more of an applied math topic rather than math itself, Digital Design can have a tremendous impact on your understanding of the system -- particularly when dealing with hardware or a compiler bug.
And to toss in some non-math, Operating Systems is another great topic -- as well as Compiler Design. You'll see lots of methods for doing things that you have to do regularly anyway while gaining a deeper understanding of the "behind the scenes" operations.
In summary: person that knows little to nothing of communications technology finds that communications technology is useful. I think this is more of a story for "Reader's Digest" -- not a self-proclaimed "News for Nerds" site.
The iPad is exactly everything I need for a college computation platform minus one thing -- it won't deliver in time to be useful to me this semester. So I'll wait until the Fall to buy one.
I use my iPhone for 90% of my mobile computing needs, but I wish the screen was bigger. I could bring a laptop along, but it's more weight/size than I want to carry -- netbook included. The iPad fits right in between those two for me. I already have Kindle reader on my iPhone, I use OmniFocus for my organization, and of course there's web browsing and email. Putting that together with Keynote (for presentations) and I'm good to go.
I did find the "questions" a little odd. The mail app on the iPhone does Exchange. And I can access docs on my iPhone also (which *does* require a.Mac account that many wouldn't be willing to pay for -- so that's not a complete answer).
Anyway -- it's going to have the full iWork suite. One would think those documents would have to live somewhere.
Okay, I suppose I'm going to tagged flametroll although I'm just being honest...
I see no real threat to Safari from any version of Opera, Mini or not. I've tried repeatedly over the years to give Opera incarnations "the old college try." I've been left relatively unimpressed. This after having all of the incredible features and benefits pointed out to me time and again. One of the worst of the bunch was the OM I ran on my Samsung D307.
Anyway, to make a long story short (too late), it would seem that approving Opera on the iPhone could only improve Safari's image. And if OM turns out to have some advantages, Apple can always improve Safari to match (in theory).
As an aside, I found the summary mildly confusing. However, like Opera, I haven't submitted an app to the App Store and I'm hoping that Apple won't deny their users a choice. Something like that...
So, perhaps for me chunks of GV might not be useful (I tend to stack up a lot of rollover minutes), but perhaps someone with a different plan could save some money with it. I still have the 1st gen iPhone (EDGE) with the cheapest plan which is essentially unlimited free long distance and local calls for my usage patterns, so there's very little I can do to save more money.
Another responder pointed out the free texting within the WebApp. I might find that useful. I somewhat limit my texting just because I have the 200/month limit.
Okay. So it's a GV management system also. For me, the free texting might be worth the time in setting up a GV account. Thanks.
As to the sarcasm, etc. -- after I posted my response, I thought about posting an apology to you for also being an ass. I was a bit tired which, for me, translates to cranky. Thanks for the apology. And sorry I volleyed back.
Except that it uses up your iPhone plan's minutes anyway. So I'm back to not understanding what the point in the iPhone webapp is. It just looks to me like an iPhone dialer that lets you have your Google Voice caller ID show up on the other end. And, apparently, the possibility of cheaper out-of-country long distance.
So I'm back to not seeing the point in the iPhone GV webapp (which apparently three commenters took to mean I didn't get the point of GV itself).
Maybe you should actually learn how to read a question as a question rather than being an ass. Although apparently you didn't mind spending time being an ass, so perhaps I've done you a service by asking a question.
Ultimately, I see a webapp that lets me bypass the iPhone's integrated address book so that I can dial numbers using my Google address book using the same air time I would use whether I used Google Voice or not. The only difference appears to be that my caller id on the other end isn't my iPhone number.
So the open source and free software movements created Mac OS X, which also runs the iPhone.
OS X is derived in large part from NeXT, which precedes FOSS/Linux etc. by quite a few years. In its current state it certainly embraces a lot of open source and also contributes to open source. But to say that OS X was created by the open source movement is just utter bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
It's been a while since I read Diamond Age, but wasn't there a human behind the technology?
That aside, I think this is pretty cool tech. I keep waiting for the eye trackers to check interpupillary distance so that focus works within rendered 3D enviros. But this is a nice start. I just hope they remove that awful background music from the production version.
Maybe you're just projecting, but I did see an indication that the OP was upset.
So trade in your iPhone for something else then. I mean, given how upset you seem to be about this, you obviously are an iPhone user, right?
On a related note, how does the temperature of the oceans stack up statistically to the price of housing?
I doubt that more than 2.125786% of conjectures are anything but wild-ass-guesses.
That's why aircraft software development has extensive procedures that start with requirements all the way through delivery (see: DO-178). Which is also why aircraft critical software bugs are rare (although certainly not unheard of). The automotive manufacturers should be developing to similar standards. Perhaps this incident will put more pressure down that path. It wasn't all that long ago (maybe 15 years or so) that medical software also had no development requirements - they eventually went to something patterned after DO-178b, as I recall. But not before some deaths.
So... 52 people hyped to death. That might be some kind of record.
Perhaps /. could lead the way by providing an open database of their stories and comments (license changes would be needed with opt-out).
Then again, I might just think that because I'd rather have a different interface to the same info rather than the one I'm stuck with.
Damn. I was planning on getting an iPad with GSM so that I could tether my iPod Touch to it. I'm betting I'm not gonna be able to do that either. Well -- there goes my iPad purchase. And tell Steve J. I said so!!!
Why exactly was there a Congressional investigation into Ford when their Explorers were prone to rollover? Really - heaven forbid Toyota get the same treatment as other automotive manufacturers. No one even said anything when Toyota redesigned their trucks to fix a serious safety issue but didn't bother to recall the trucks with the problem.
If you want to bitch about irrelevant issues, let's ask why the DoJ is threatening to investigate the BCS.
What's so bad about IR?
Sounds like you need an annoying dog that insists on standing in front of the electronics rack at the precise moment that you're trying to stop that TiVo fast-forward. :)
I thought this action was interesting. Today I learned that MS did something I agree with via domain locking. Yesterday I learned that MS did something I disagreed with via domain locking (http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/24/1939257/Cryptome-in-Hot-Water-Again).
I'm not quite sure how I feel about the totality of this...
If only we were talking about LCI's. Unfortunately, I was responding to this:
The statement by the OP was that the purpose of the sensor wasn't to detect water but was just a plan to avoid warranty claims. My anecdotal response was merely to show that it's not as black & white as (s)he would like to believe. If anything, it would be far cheaper for them to add shock monitoring code to the firmware so that claims like mine could be easily denied.
This is just shattering my whole world view. Today it may be The National InfoQuirer putting out mud-raking stories full of bogus information. But I fear for tomorrow. Who knows, we might even see pillars of objectivity such as kdawson approving stories with the same level of journalistic integrity.
Scary times...
Then certainly they don't give a fuck about the LCI either which makes it moot -- at least according to your hypothesis.
I suppose this is where I'm supposed to call you "Angry random internet dude without any actual evidence vs. an actual replacement story.." or something equally childish. But I'll refrain.
I went into an Apple store and got my original iPhone replaced 10 months after buying it because I dropped it two stories onto concrete. It still worked, but it wouldn't take a charge and the main button was constantly pressed. I admitted to the damage vector (it was a bit hard not too -- major scratches and dings on the aluminum). They tested my phone, verified that it wouldn't take a charge, wiped my current phone, swapped the SIM into a new phone, activated it, and sent me on my way.
Those eeeevil bastards.
Perhaps I missed some comments due to my filter settings, but I didn't see anyone directly recommending Discrete Math/Finite Math. That's a pretty important topic -- I did see it sort of mentioned in passing as part of other topics, but having a deep understanding of discrete would help a lot. Boolean logic topics like DeMorgan's theorem & Carnot maps can help you considerably with optimization and even just reviewing the logic portions can help you avoid those "if/else/oops" scenarios wherein you forget to consider one of the cases of a logic statement.
Linear Algebra can also be extremely helpful for a fair number of problems that arise and it can also lead you into linear optimization topics.
Although more of an applied math topic rather than math itself, Digital Design can have a tremendous impact on your understanding of the system -- particularly when dealing with hardware or a compiler bug.
And to toss in some non-math, Operating Systems is another great topic -- as well as Compiler Design. You'll see lots of methods for doing things that you have to do regularly anyway while gaining a deeper understanding of the "behind the scenes" operations.
In summary: person that knows little to nothing of communications technology finds that communications technology is useful. I think this is more of a story for "Reader's Digest" -- not a self-proclaimed "News for Nerds" site.
The iPad is exactly everything I need for a college computation platform minus one thing -- it won't deliver in time to be useful to me this semester. So I'll wait until the Fall to buy one.
I use my iPhone for 90% of my mobile computing needs, but I wish the screen was bigger. I could bring a laptop along, but it's more weight/size than I want to carry -- netbook included. The iPad fits right in between those two for me. I already have Kindle reader on my iPhone, I use OmniFocus for my organization, and of course there's web browsing and email. Putting that together with Keynote (for presentations) and I'm good to go.
I did find the "questions" a little odd. The mail app on the iPhone does Exchange. And I can access docs on my iPhone also (which *does* require a .Mac account that many wouldn't be willing to pay for -- so that's not a complete answer).
Anyway -- it's going to have the full iWork suite. One would think those documents would have to live somewhere.
Okay, I suppose I'm going to tagged flametroll although I'm just being honest...
I see no real threat to Safari from any version of Opera, Mini or not. I've tried repeatedly over the years to give Opera incarnations "the old college try." I've been left relatively unimpressed. This after having all of the incredible features and benefits pointed out to me time and again. One of the worst of the bunch was the OM I ran on my Samsung D307.
Anyway, to make a long story short (too late), it would seem that approving Opera on the iPhone could only improve Safari's image. And if OM turns out to have some advantages, Apple can always improve Safari to match (in theory).
As an aside, I found the summary mildly confusing. However, like Opera, I haven't submitted an app to the App Store and I'm hoping that Apple won't deny their users a choice. Something like that...
So, perhaps for me chunks of GV might not be useful (I tend to stack up a lot of rollover minutes), but perhaps someone with a different plan could save some money with it. I still have the 1st gen iPhone (EDGE) with the cheapest plan which is essentially unlimited free long distance and local calls for my usage patterns, so there's very little I can do to save more money.
Another responder pointed out the free texting within the WebApp. I might find that useful. I somewhat limit my texting just because I have the 200/month limit.
Thanks for taking the time to followup.
Okay. So it's a GV management system also. For me, the free texting might be worth the time in setting up a GV account. Thanks.
As to the sarcasm, etc. -- after I posted my response, I thought about posting an apology to you for also being an ass. I was a bit tired which, for me, translates to cranky. Thanks for the apology. And sorry I volleyed back.
Except that it uses up your iPhone plan's minutes anyway. So I'm back to not understanding what the point in the iPhone webapp is. It just looks to me like an iPhone dialer that lets you have your Google Voice caller ID show up on the other end. And, apparently, the possibility of cheaper out-of-country long distance.
So I'm back to not seeing the point in the iPhone GV webapp (which apparently three commenters took to mean I didn't get the point of GV itself).
Maybe you should actually learn how to read a question as a question rather than being an ass. Although apparently you didn't mind spending time being an ass, so perhaps I've done you a service by asking a question.
Ultimately, I see a webapp that lets me bypass the iPhone's integrated address book so that I can dial numbers using my Google address book using the same air time I would use whether I used Google Voice or not. The only difference appears to be that my caller id on the other end isn't my iPhone number.
Is that somehow incorrect?
And the point in this is what, exactly?
Really. I don't get it. Reduced price out-of-country calling or something?
Or is this just a way to shield your origin so that you always present your "Google Face" to the world...
OS X is derived in large part from NeXT, which precedes FOSS/Linux etc. by quite a few years. In its current state it certainly embraces a lot of open source and also contributes to open source. But to say that OS X was created by the open source movement is just utter bullshit.
Errr.... never mind. Where's the delete post button at again?