You are correct. Read the fine print on that contract that you sign and you may find that you have actually agreed to have the cable company install any software that may be necessary for your computer to access their network. It's most likely a really really lose contract giving them quite a few rights. It may even be something that you didn't actually sign but that refferenced another document. They are very very sneaky about stuff like that.
An article about webblogging without slashcode?
on
Blogger Hacked
·
· Score: 2
I'm almost appaled at the fact that there is an article about weblogging (ugh, that's like Kroger and their 'krogering'. I dislike that word) without a mention of Slashcode? Of course slashcode has more features and is trickier to use than most people who use blogger probably want to deal with. It's also more geared towards news and discussion sites of course, but I have noticed several/.-ers (CmdrTaco especially) in the past reccomend it whenever they mention weblogging
Re:"kick-ass system administrator"
on
Blogger Hacked
·
· Score: 1
I wonder if they still think that their system administrator is so 'kick ass'?
I'm not sure that we will see home grown BLOCKBUSTERS, as much as it may become the hobby of people to create there own 'shorts'. First off, joe average probably isn't going to want to sit down for the number of hours it would take to render an entire film. This is a generation where people honestly like things in short little bits and don't like spending a lot of time on them. I think that you will find that there will be hobbyists who play with it, however most people won't. The way I see it is that if you create something, you might put it out on a website, or on a P2P program, or give it to some friends, and it might then get somewhat popular, at least with a group of people, that way. I don't think you'll see a full-scale 'blockbuster' for a long time however.
What this does do though is it allows smaller companies to produce better effects more cheaply. It will be cheaper to train students on the software at film schools, as there are more and more hobbyists, people might 'play' with it if it's free, and then we might see even more 3d rendering in our advertising, television, and other media. It will just become less spectacle to us, and more commonplace....
Maybe we should go ahead and start a fund to buy a copy of this book for Southwest Airlines;)
All kidding aside though, as a general rule you can look at your website in lynx in my opinion to tell whether or not it is going to be accessible. I knwo this isn't the best way, but it's an option. Frames of course would be the biggest problem, however creating a text-only version of your website (many government websites have this) and putting the link somewhere near the top of your page is usually considered suitable. No graphics, flash, etc, but with most, or the same functionality of the original site, or at least a SUITABLE level...
Actually, I'm not sure that isn't a UNIX terminal.... look at it VERY closely.... What would be classic is if somebody proved that it was something like an old mac, It might actually be an old LC or Quadra or something.... now wouldn't THAT be funny...
I like the fact that if you look even closer at the link to the fourth image down, you'll notice that that actually ISN'T a blue screen of death. It's either an old dos edit terminal, but upon closer inspection, I think it actually may be Word Perfect 5.1... I guarantee you it's not Microsoft Works Suite 2003..:)
I know that people have said it over and over again when anybody adopts linux en mass like this, but it honestly does say something about linux and the open-source movement. It is always great to see more support, and of course if more and more people use the software, the software becomes better and better and more of it becomes available. That's one of the great things about Free/GPL'd software... At least, in a perfect world that's how it works...
if you read the second paragraph in the article and follow the first link Section 5 then you may find more answers.
I think parts of the site may be suffering mildly from the/. effect though....
Traditionally the.org domain was for individuals and non-profits. This of course changed in the late 90's. Actually if memory serves me right,.org websites domains were originally free to have. As you currently own the domains, you shouldn't have to worry about any changes in the domaim management system. My guess is that you would be grandfathered in. If for some reason you let your registration lapse, or if you decided that you wanted NEW.org websites, then it would be a problem I would think (if the rules change)
SOME sort of signal is going to be bounced back, but it would have to be quite a strong of radiowave to get any sort of usable data. To get a signal strong enough from say, a cellphone tower, you would have to risk exposing people in the nearby area with very high levels of radiation.
No, because of the fact that human tissue is a lossy dielectric, you could not track individuals unless they are carrying something that could tx a signal or at least bounce the signal back.
From the article The system, used alongside technology which allows individuals to be identified by their mobile phone handsets, will mewan that individuals can be located and their movements watched on a screen from hundreds of miles away. alsoThe technology 'sees' the shapes made when radio waves emitted by mobile phone masts meet an obstruction. Signals bounced back by immobile objects, such as walls or trees, by the way, trees also would not relect radio waves if I am correct....... Remember, radio waves pass through things... otherwise you couldn't use your cellular phone in, your car, or, your house... etc.....
Exactly. Biological tissue is a lossy dielectric. This isn't really radar though to begin with in any sense. The only tracking that could be done would be that they could see your location in relation to the cellphone tower based upon the range of your signal, and overlay that to a map. It would not BE radar, it would be more like a homing device. They could tell the location of a cellphone that was turned on, and they could see it's movement, however they could not 'SEE' an individual, they could not see the size of an individual, and they could not use the cellphone tower to gather a profile of the individual. They could simply track the individuals movements. Unless there is an item on your person that is able to respond, not just reflect, the cellphone signal, it doesn't matter.
This really isn't that new of a technology. I know it has been proposed here in the US on some highways to use information like the number of cellphones in an area, the information could be used to track things like traffic congestion, and then monitoring centers could direct highway patrol to problem areas. It might also help alert highway patrol of accidents, etc. The idea is that they monitor the flow and can see the number of cellphones in an area. The technology of course makes sense because so many people have cellphones and with digital cellphone technology your phone maintains a constant, or almost constant connection to the cellphone tower to my understanding, whether you are making a phone call or not. I know that if you look at this http://money.tbo.com/money/MGAKCWDF15D.html that you can see where this sort of technology has already been used, but not applying to cellular phones. The idea is essentially the same however. I believe that the cellphone traffic technology stuff I'm talking about was planned for testing somewhere south of D.C. on the beltway or something. It was either Virginia or Maryland where I saw something about it though. Don't know if it ever got implemented.
Some people may also know that reccent government mandates in the US have required cellphone companies and manufacturers to be able to locate a cellphone call to a more precise geographical area. I believe that the goal is something like 25 feet or so. I think the requirement is 300 feet right now. Not sure on this though. The reason stated was of course for 911 calls, however other uses could be conceived.
People can turn their cellphones off, however there are some theories that the phone may still give off some signals (so just remove the battery). Of course new legislation will require you not to remove the battery and the phone will not be able to be opened, etc or else you'll be brought to court under DMCA type laws! heheh Maybe going into areas of 'No Service' will be forbidden too:)
Eh... personally, I am not a big fan of 'gestures'. Honestly these would probably be more hurtful then helpful to me (I tend to just play with my cursor while I'm reading or if I'm bored). It's a neat idea, but I have to agree with StefMeister, I'm almost completely keyboard-dependent. Honestly, except when I'm 'browsing for fun' it's not uncommon to find me using lynx instead of a traditional desktop browser (Mozilla, NS, MSIE, Konqueror). But I guess some users will find this useful, then I sorta have to wonder how many people it will just totally confuse... (Think 'Joe Average' user)
When we were looking at new search engines for the campus internet here at the University there were times I wished that we were able to use meta tags to weigh results. Unfortunately the implementation would have been a nightmare we decided. They make sense on a small site possibly, less than 100,000 pages, where there are only a few departments designing and building websites, but to come up with and implement the proper meta tags for each department to use (and knowing that people still probably would not use them correctly) would have been a nightmare. (We have somewhere around 1.5 million pages at last estimate)
Basically what I'm saying is Meta-tags are only useful if they have actual relevance, and really are only useful for companies that are trying to design their own intranet and sitelevel extranet search engines.
The exhibit is still available at http://quatloos.com/brad-c/directory01.htm Picked that up through google cache;) Apparently they are trying NOT to get/.'ed? I don't know. The rest of the site seems to work ok....
I guess having a video-enabled tooth-phone wouldn't be much help either to anybody except your dentist or orthodontist:) I wonder what the regulations would be like about using one of these while you are driving... Oh yes, and of course, we could now have no idea whether or not the crazy people walking down the street ranting, mumbling, or screaming were crazy, or talking on a brand new tooth-phone!:)
Oh yes, and then of course people would be hanging their heads out windows and opening up their mouths to the sky to try to get better reception:)
Apparently they already are thinking about it...
on
P2P Television?
·
· Score: 1
Please note, that Fortune Magazine article is on an AOL/TIME-Warner website. As in CNN, as in Turner Networks, as in Time Warner Cable. They obviously are considering it to some level, and I'm sure a few people in the company will read this article. How much notice they'll take is another thing, whether they'll do anything to try to stop it.... Chances are though they will do so, and as quick as possible. AOL Time Warner is one of the largest TV and entertainment conglomerates out there...
Simple business. Apple wants to make this a very sought after product. If they only make it available for their computers then it means people will buy THEIR computers so that they can have an IPOD. It's very simple. Yes, you would think that if they made this one product available to a wider customer base that they would improve their profits, but then you have to remember that they also don't offer their operating system for x86 (and it's also written into the MacOS license agreement that it is illegal to use the operating system on a non-apple branded computer) architecture. If Mac would offer support for the operating system and have an x86 version of the operating system as well as a powerpc version (g3, g4, 680xx) as well as sell both types of hardware I think they could become more dominant in the industry, but they are very tied to their hardware.
The bottom line? Apple doesn't want non-mac support for the IPOD because their profits are so heavily tied to people buying THEIR computers. It wouldn't surprise me if somewhere in the IPOD license agreement it says you can only use it with a computer using the Macintosh Operating System.
unfortunately, my experiences with all handhelds has been less than satisfactory when I have purchased one for under 200.00, I guess you can say that you get what you pay for. Honestly it's somewhat hard to be able to validate paying more than 200 though for something that doesn't do everything I would like it to as easily as I would like it to yet. It's still somewhat new (and often somewhat proprietary) technology, so things change every quarter or two....
I went through multiple windows ce units, as well as a TI Avigo and now I'm using a palm m100. I often have many problems with syncing, the software will freeze up or the palm won't talk to my desktop properly. The unit also had a dark spot in the bottom right hand side of the screen though. My favorite pda so far that I've ever owned is a tie between my Ti Avigo and my Hp JORNADA (although I don't like running windows). The biggest problem I've found with pda's? It's too easy to break the screen, and often they are too bulky. I like that many of them have screen covers now though, more than used to. It means fewer scratches, and units seem to be a bit better built than they were a while ago, still, you often get a flimsy plastic case when your in the 200.00 and under market, while if you go up in price you get metal alloy's or a thicker plastic case...
If you are INTENTIONALLY blocking or not viewing the license file and KNOWINGLY doing it I'm not sure that this is true. Think about it, if the copyright page is missing from the encyclopedia, because you or someone else has torn it out, are you still bound to the copyright law? The answer is unfortunately, yes I believe. True, in your eyes you might not be bound to the agreement, but in the eyes of the US court system you probably still are....
The truth is you most likely won't see a bunch of different windows releases actually. I'd be more suspicious of one windows that is COMPATIBLE with other windows, but is painful to use (i.e. an 'upgraded' win3.1, or WinCE for the x86) Essentially something that COULD be used, but nobody would WANT to. Microsoft WANTS to lock you in, and if they can find some way to 'appease' the government, and at the same time keep their grip, they will. They might also make it COMPLICATED to get the stripped down version, it would have to be available to everybody, but it might not be available on all new PC's because of the way microsoft has been known to market/license it's OS to OEM's.
In short, they will be required to make it available, but they will make sure that it's something that NOBODY wants....
Because skateboarding/rollerskating has a 'negative' conotation. The idea of doing tricks and jumping on stuff, etc. Most of those signs are also located on PRIVATE property (shopping malls, strip malls, etc). The local governments ruling on allowing segways on sidewalks does not carry over to the private sidewalks at mini-malls and grocery stores, they can still ban segways.
However it will not surprise me if they eventually tell Segway riders that they will have to use bicycle lanes if it gets to the point that Segways become a popular item in most cities. At this point very few people actually have these units, so it's not as much a problem. Yes, there is most likely some lobbying on the part of segway as well as private entities to allow these to be used on sidewalks, but it will not surprise me if other organizations (Sierra Club, local runner/walking groups, and MAYBE the AARP) ask for rules REGULATING the use of Segways in areas when/if they become popular for the masses, however I don't see this as being a problem until the price comes down and/or there are more competing companies making similar products.
I think what it is is that at maximum speed there is enough compensation created by the gyroscope that the Segway 'falling forwards' isn't a problem. This COULD cause a problem however if you were heavier than the segway's weight limit. If I understand properly the gyroscopes keep the segway balanced, and as long as the weight of the person who is on the segway is under the segways 'weight limit' (200 something pounds) then the gyrosope/speed ratio will be able to keep the rider balanced.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct. Read the fine print on that contract that you sign and you may find that you have actually agreed to have the cable company install any software that may be necessary for your computer to access their network. It's most likely a really really lose contract giving them quite a few rights. It may even be something that you didn't actually sign but that refferenced another document. They are very very sneaky about stuff like that.
I'm almost appaled at the fact that there is an article about weblogging (ugh, that's like Kroger and their 'krogering'. I dislike that word) without a mention of Slashcode? Of course slashcode has more features and is trickier to use than most people who use blogger probably want to deal with. It's also more geared towards news and discussion sites of course, but I have noticed several /.-ers (CmdrTaco especially) in the past reccomend it whenever they mention weblogging
I wonder if they still think that their system administrator is so 'kick ass'?
I'm not sure that we will see home grown BLOCKBUSTERS, as much as it may become the hobby of people to create there own 'shorts'. First off, joe average probably isn't going to want to sit down for the number of hours it would take to render an entire film. This is a generation where people honestly like things in short little bits and don't like spending a lot of time on them. I think that you will find that there will be hobbyists who play with it, however most people won't.
The way I see it is that if you create something, you might put it out on a website, or on a P2P program, or give it to some friends, and it might then get somewhat popular, at least with a group of people, that way. I don't think you'll see a full-scale 'blockbuster' for a long time however.
What this does do though is it allows smaller companies to produce better effects more cheaply. It will be cheaper to train students on the software at film schools, as there are more and more hobbyists, people might 'play' with it if it's free, and then we might see even more 3d rendering in our advertising, television, and other media. It will just become less spectacle to us, and more commonplace....
Maybe we should go ahead and start a fund to buy a copy of this book for Southwest Airlines ;)
All kidding aside though, as a general rule you can look at your website in lynx in my opinion to tell whether or not it is going to be accessible. I knwo this isn't the best way, but it's an option. Frames of course would be the biggest problem, however creating a text-only version of your website (many government websites have this) and putting the link somewhere near the top of your page is usually considered suitable. No graphics, flash, etc, but with most, or the same functionality of the original site, or at least a SUITABLE level...
Actually, I'm not sure that isn't a UNIX terminal.... look at it VERY closely.... What would be classic is if somebody proved that it was something like an old mac, It might actually be an old LC or Quadra or something.... now wouldn't THAT be funny...
I like the fact that if you look even closer at the link to the fourth image down, you'll notice that that actually ISN'T a blue screen of death. It's either an old dos edit terminal, but upon closer inspection, I think it actually may be Word Perfect 5.1... I guarantee you it's not Microsoft Works Suite 2003.. :)
I know that people have said it over and over again when anybody adopts linux en mass like this, but it honestly does say something about linux and the open-source movement. It is always great to see more support, and of course if more and more people use the software, the software becomes better and better and more of it becomes available. That's one of the great things about Free/GPL'd software... At least, in a perfect world that's how it works...
more from me...
/. effect though....
if you read the second paragraph in the article and follow the first link Section 5 then you may find more answers.
I think parts of the site may be suffering mildly from the
Traditionally the .org domain was for individuals and non-profits. This of course changed in the late 90's. Actually if memory serves me right, .org websites domains were originally free to have. .org websites, then it would be a problem I would think (if the rules change)
As you currently own the domains, you shouldn't have to worry about any changes in the domaim management system. My guess is that you would be grandfathered in. If for some reason you let your registration lapse, or if you decided that you wanted NEW
SOME sort of signal is going to be bounced back, but it would have to be quite a strong of radiowave to get any sort of usable data. To get a signal strong enough from say, a cellphone tower, you would have to risk exposing people in the nearby area with very high levels of radiation.
No, because of the fact that human tissue is a lossy dielectric, you could not track individuals unless they are carrying something that could tx a signal or at least bounce the signal back.
From the article The system, used alongside technology which allows individuals to be identified by their mobile phone handsets, will mewan that individuals can be located and their movements watched on a screen from hundreds of miles away.
alsoThe technology 'sees' the shapes made when radio waves emitted by mobile phone masts meet an obstruction. Signals bounced back by immobile objects, such as walls or trees,
by the way, trees also would not relect radio waves if I am correct....... Remember, radio waves pass through things... otherwise you couldn't use your cellular phone in, your car, or, your house... etc.....
Exactly. Biological tissue is a lossy dielectric. This isn't really radar though to begin with in any sense. The only tracking that could be done would be that they could see your location in relation to the cellphone tower based upon the range of your signal, and overlay that to a map. It would not BE radar, it would be more like a homing device. They could tell the location of a cellphone that was turned on, and they could see it's movement, however they could not 'SEE' an individual, they could not see the size of an individual, and they could not use the cellphone tower to gather a profile of the individual. They could simply track the individuals movements. Unless there is an item on your person that is able to respond, not just reflect, the cellphone signal, it doesn't matter.
This really isn't that new of a technology. I know it has been proposed here in the US on some highways to use information like the number of cellphones in an area, the information could be used to track things like traffic congestion, and then monitoring centers could direct highway patrol to problem areas. It might also help alert highway patrol of accidents, etc. The idea is that they monitor the flow and can see the number of cellphones in an area. The technology of course makes sense because so many people have cellphones and with digital cellphone technology your phone maintains a constant, or almost constant connection to the cellphone tower to my understanding, whether you are making a phone call or not. I know that if you look at this http://money.tbo.com/money/MGAKCWDF15D.html that you can see where this sort of technology has already been used, but not applying to cellular phones. The idea is essentially the same however. I believe that the cellphone traffic technology stuff I'm talking about was planned for testing somewhere south of D.C. on the beltway or something. It was either Virginia or Maryland where I saw something about it though. Don't know if it ever got implemented.
:)
Some people may also know that reccent government mandates in the US have required cellphone companies and manufacturers to be able to locate a cellphone call to a more precise geographical area. I believe that the goal is something like 25 feet or so. I think the requirement is 300 feet right now. Not sure on this though. The reason stated was of course for 911 calls, however other uses could be conceived.
People can turn their cellphones off, however there are some theories that the phone may still give off some signals (so just remove the battery). Of course new legislation will require you not to remove the battery and the phone will not be able to be opened, etc or else you'll be brought to court under DMCA type laws! heheh Maybe going into areas of 'No Service' will be forbidden too
Eh... personally, I am not a big fan of 'gestures'. Honestly these would probably be more hurtful then helpful to me (I tend to just play with my cursor while I'm reading or if I'm bored). It's a neat idea, but I have to agree with StefMeister, I'm almost completely keyboard-dependent. Honestly, except when I'm 'browsing for fun' it's not uncommon to find me using lynx instead of a traditional desktop browser (Mozilla, NS, MSIE, Konqueror). But I guess some users will find this useful, then I sorta have to wonder how many people it will just totally confuse... (Think 'Joe Average' user)
When we were looking at new search engines for the campus internet here at the University there were times I wished that we were able to use meta tags to weigh results. Unfortunately the implementation would have been a nightmare we decided. They make sense on a small site possibly, less than 100,000 pages, where there are only a few departments designing and building websites, but to come up with and implement the proper meta tags for each department to use (and knowing that people still probably would not use them correctly) would have been a nightmare. (We have somewhere around 1.5 million pages at last estimate)
Basically what I'm saying is Meta-tags are only useful if they have actual relevance, and really are only useful for companies that are trying to design their own intranet and sitelevel extranet search engines.
The exhibit is still available at http://quatloos.com/brad-c/directory01.htm ;) Apparently they are trying NOT to get /.'ed? I don't know. The rest of the site seems to work ok....
Picked that up through google cache
I guess having a video-enabled tooth-phone wouldn't be much help either to anybody except your dentist or orthodontist :) :)
:)
I wonder what the regulations would be like about using one of these while you are driving...
Oh yes, and of course, we could now have no idea whether or not the crazy people walking down the street ranting, mumbling, or screaming were crazy, or talking on a brand new tooth-phone!
Oh yes, and then of course people would be hanging their heads out windows and opening up their mouths to the sky to try to get better reception
Please note, that Fortune Magazine article is on an AOL/TIME-Warner website. As in CNN, as in Turner Networks, as in Time Warner Cable. They obviously are considering it to some level, and I'm sure a few people in the company will read this article. How much notice they'll take is another thing, whether they'll do anything to try to stop it.... Chances are though they will do so, and as quick as possible. AOL Time Warner is one of the largest TV and entertainment conglomerates out there...
Simple business. Apple wants to make this a very sought after product. If they only make it available for their computers then it means people will buy THEIR computers so that they can have an IPOD. It's very simple. Yes, you would think that if they made this one product available to a wider customer base that they would improve their profits, but then you have to remember that they also don't offer their operating system for x86 (and it's also written into the MacOS license agreement that it is illegal to use the operating system on a non-apple branded computer) architecture. If Mac would offer support for the operating system and have an x86 version of the operating system as well as a powerpc version (g3, g4, 680xx) as well as sell both types of hardware I think they could become more dominant in the industry, but they are very tied to their hardware.
The bottom line? Apple doesn't want non-mac support for the IPOD because their profits are so heavily tied to people buying THEIR computers. It wouldn't surprise me if somewhere in the IPOD license agreement it says you can only use it with a computer using the Macintosh Operating System.
unfortunately, my experiences with all handhelds has been less than satisfactory when I have purchased one for under 200.00, I guess you can say that you get what you pay for. Honestly it's somewhat hard to be able to validate paying more than 200 though for something that doesn't do everything I would like it to as easily as I would like it to yet. It's still somewhat new (and often somewhat proprietary) technology, so things change every quarter or two....
I went through multiple windows ce units, as well as a TI Avigo and now I'm using a palm m100. I often have many problems with syncing, the software will freeze up or the palm won't talk to my desktop properly. The unit also had a dark spot in the bottom right hand side of the screen though. My favorite pda so far that I've ever owned is a tie between my Ti Avigo and my Hp JORNADA (although I don't like running windows).
The biggest problem I've found with pda's? It's too easy to break the screen, and often they are too bulky. I like that many of them have screen covers now though, more than used to. It means fewer scratches, and units seem to be a bit better built than they were a while ago, still, you often get a flimsy plastic case when your in the 200.00 and under market, while if you go up in price you get metal alloy's or a thicker plastic case...
If you are INTENTIONALLY blocking or not viewing the license file and KNOWINGLY doing it I'm not sure that this is true. Think about it, if the copyright page is missing from the encyclopedia, because you or someone else has torn it out, are you still bound to the copyright law? The answer is unfortunately, yes I believe. True, in your eyes you might not be bound to the agreement, but in the eyes of the US court system you probably still are....
The truth is you most likely won't see a bunch of different windows releases actually. I'd be more suspicious of one windows that is COMPATIBLE with other windows, but is painful to use (i.e. an 'upgraded' win3.1, or WinCE for the x86) Essentially something that COULD be used, but nobody would WANT to. Microsoft WANTS to lock you in, and if they can find some way to 'appease' the government, and at the same time keep their grip, they will. They might also make it COMPLICATED to get the stripped down version, it would have to be available to everybody, but it might not be available on all new PC's because of the way microsoft has been known to market/license it's OS to OEM's.
In short, they will be required to make it available, but they will make sure that it's something that NOBODY wants....
Because skateboarding/rollerskating has a 'negative' conotation. The idea of doing tricks and jumping on stuff, etc. Most of those signs are also located on PRIVATE property (shopping malls, strip malls, etc). The local governments ruling on allowing segways on sidewalks does not carry over to the private sidewalks at mini-malls and grocery stores, they can still ban segways.
However it will not surprise me if they eventually tell Segway riders that they will have to use bicycle lanes if it gets to the point that Segways become a popular item in most cities. At this point very few people actually have these units, so it's not as much a problem. Yes, there is most likely some lobbying on the part of segway as well as private entities to allow these to be used on sidewalks, but it will not surprise me if other organizations (Sierra Club, local runner/walking groups, and MAYBE the AARP) ask for rules REGULATING the use of Segways in areas when/if they become popular for the masses, however I don't see this as being a problem until the price comes down and/or there are more competing companies making similar products.
I think what it is is that at maximum speed there is enough compensation created by the gyroscope that the Segway 'falling forwards' isn't a problem. This COULD cause a problem however if you were heavier than the segway's weight limit. If I understand properly the gyroscopes keep the segway balanced, and as long as the weight of the person who is on the segway is under the segways 'weight limit' (200 something pounds) then the gyrosope/speed ratio will be able to keep the rider balanced.