What I think is extra funny about this is that, during the keynote speach, Steve Jobs made a big deal of the fact that the iPhone runs OS X and the crowd was very impressed by that. Now, I wonder what Steve Jobs thought the crowd was thinking when he told them that the iPhone "runs OS X".
He must have thought, "Cool. People like using OS X so much that the mere fact that we used it on this phone has them all giddy."
Rather than (the more obvious), "People are really excited about the possibility of being able to run a great variety of apps that utilizes various OS X APIs on this thing."
When I wrote "implementation" I meant an actual, working implementation, as opposed to a piece of paper describing an implementation. Unless it's a blueprint, describing exactly how to put the invention together (with real, obtainable parts), a description of an implementation is still just a (nearly worthless) idea.
I'll say it again: Ideas are almost entirely worthless.
Seriously. It's the implementation that counts. This is the problem most people have with the patent system, without even realizing that that's what their problem with it is.
Hey, here's any idea: personal transporters. You'd never have to waste time going anywhere!
Want something more realistic? Pretend it's 1990. How about a really, really good Internet search?
Patents should only be granted if the inventor has an implementation or, at the very least, a plan for an implementation with a time limit on when the implementation must happen.
They should have just marked the winning tickets in some subtle way and then purchased and redeemed them as they came off the roll in the normal process of selling them. Customers that bought more than one ticket at a time might end up with one of you winning tickets, but it's still better. Or, when a winning ticket was getting close to the end of the roll (like within 3 tickets of being bought), you could just go ahead and buy the losers too.
Pepsi and Coke have long-standing agreements allowing one another to mention the other's brand in their respective advertisements. It's rather brilliant. They've, together, made themselves the only two real players in the market.
The artist would simply get more from the (supposed) greater volume. Ten times one penny is the same as One times ten pennies. They have no fixed costs per download, as Apple does.
The data is everything after the '3.' on one line, bzipped.
That seems a little arbitrary. Surely they could also have left off the "14" that comes after the "3.". Or even, "1415962" etc.
Last time they did this, taking the sales tax into account, it was two cents cheaper for me to get a song by buying a winning bottle of Pepsi (I cheated, see here) than it was for me to buy the song directly from the iTMS. And that doesn't even take into account the value of the Pepsi itself.
Here's the only one of his predictions for 2014 that seemed plausible to me:
On the way home, you'll stop to pick up a few things at the grocery store. No standing in line, though, to check out: you'll just waltz out the front door, as the Radio Frequency ID chips in the products you've bought allow their costs to be tallied and your account automatically debited.
The rest just have too many hurdles. Not just technological, but political, market-driven, etc.
I always thought there were 5 of everything to keep surfaces working even after a double failure. With only 4 actuators, if 2 fail, and start working against the other 2, the working pair can't overpower the non-working pair and the surface is useless. With 5 actuators, it takes a triple failure before the surface won't work.
If this Man-On-Mars program ever gets started, it'll cost more than $1 trillion dollars, and, even after having paid that much, it will be dropped before anybody goes to Mars.
I live in Pennsylvania where food, including pop (soda), isn't taxed.
This creates the following situation for me and my fellow Pennsylvanians:
I can spend $1.05 ($0.99 + $0.06 tax) on a song from the iTunes Music Store or
I can spend $1.03 (there's no tax) on a song-winning Pepsi from my local Wal-Mart
Apple's iTunes Music Store (for one - don't know about other such services) allows the artist (or whoever it is that has the rights) to sell their tracks via whole albums only. While, browsing the store, I've come across a lot of tracks that I couldn't buy unless I were to buy the entire album. (which is a shame, because, in many instances, they would have at least gotten their share of 99 cents out of me)
Slashdot Mirror
What I think is extra funny about this is that, during the keynote speach, Steve Jobs made a big deal of the fact that the iPhone runs OS X and the crowd was very impressed by that. Now, I wonder what Steve Jobs thought the crowd was thinking when he told them that the iPhone "runs OS X".
He must have thought, "Cool. People like using OS X so much that the mere fact that we used it on this phone has them all giddy."
Rather than (the more obvious), "People are really excited about the possibility of being able to run a great variety of apps that utilizes various OS X APIs on this thing."
At first they fought the record companies against it, but now it makes sense for Apple to keep it.
The iTunes DRM keeps iPods as the only portable players that can play iTunes-purchased content.
Yes, I know. I should have been more specific.
When I wrote "implementation" I meant an actual, working implementation, as opposed to a piece of paper describing an implementation. Unless it's a blueprint, describing exactly how to put the invention together (with real, obtainable parts), a description of an implementation is still just a (nearly worthless) idea.
I'll say it again: Ideas are almost entirely worthless.
Seriously. It's the implementation that counts. This is the problem most people have with the patent system, without even realizing that that's what their problem with it is.
Hey, here's any idea: personal transporters. You'd never have to waste time going anywhere!
Want something more realistic? Pretend it's 1990. How about a really, really good Internet search?
Patents should only be granted if the inventor has an implementation or, at the very least, a plan for an implementation with a time limit on when the implementation must happen.
if you type "open office" into the Google toolbar, it'll help you 'access' it by telling you you can get it from www.openoffice.org
Media person: I just typed "microsoft office" into Google and the top hit was the home page for Microsoft Office!!! Google and MS are partnerizzored!!
1. All a) those b) numbers 2. and a) letters 3. make a) your 4. post a) very b) hard c) to 5. comprehend.
They should have just marked the winning tickets in some subtle way and then purchased and redeemed them as they came off the roll in the normal process of selling them. Customers that bought more than one ticket at a time might end up with one of you winning tickets, but it's still better. Or, when a winning ticket was getting close to the end of the roll (like within 3 tickets of being bought), you could just go ahead and buy the losers too.
My local ATM machine has a CRT tube, not an LCD display.
Pepsi and Coke have long-standing agreements allowing one another to mention the other's brand in their respective advertisements. It's rather brilliant. They've, together, made themselves the only two real players in the market.
It was nice while it lasted.
They look to be front projection screens. That seems like it would be really annoying to use, constantly avoiding your own shadow.
You're saying that Microsoft is going to end up buying Apple in the same way that Apple bought NeXT?
No wonder Longhorn is taking so long. Microsoft has been waiting for Apple to create it for them!
The artist would simply get more from the (supposed) greater volume. Ten times one penny is the same as One times ten pennies. They have no fixed costs per download, as Apple does.
Google frickin' rocks! (still)
Had to be said.
The data is everything after the '3.' on one line, bzipped.
That seems a little arbitrary. Surely they could also have left off the "14" that comes after the "3.". Or even, "1415962" etc.
Last time they did this, taking the sales tax into account, it was two cents cheaper for me to get a song by buying a winning bottle of Pepsi (I cheated, see here) than it was for me to buy the song directly from the iTMS. And that doesn't even take into account the value of the Pepsi itself.
Here's the only one of his predictions for 2014 that seemed plausible to me:
On the way home, you'll stop to pick up a few things at the grocery store. No standing in line, though, to check out: you'll just waltz out the front door, as the Radio Frequency ID chips in the products you've bought allow their costs to be tallied and your account automatically debited.
The rest just have too many hurdles. Not just technological, but political, market-driven, etc.
"Approaching intersection, please close eyes."
I always thought there were 5 of everything to keep surfaces working even after a double failure. With only 4 actuators, if 2 fail, and start working against the other 2, the working pair can't overpower the non-working pair and the surface is useless. With 5 actuators, it takes a triple failure before the surface won't work.
... to put on record my prediction:
If this Man-On-Mars program ever gets started, it'll cost more than $1 trillion dollars, and, even after having paid that much, it will be dropped before anybody goes to Mars.
I live in Pennsylvania where food, including pop (soda), isn't taxed.
This creates the following situation for me and my fellow Pennsylvanians:
I can spend $1.05 ($0.99 + $0.06 tax) on a song from the iTunes Music Store
or
I can spend $1.03 (there's no tax) on a song-winning Pepsi from my local Wal-Mart
$1.03 is less than $1.05
Wow, that's exactly it. Nicely explained and everything.
Wait, did somebody just mod the article down? It went from 3 down to 2 while I was replying.
Apple's iTunes Music Store (for one - don't know about other such services) allows the artist (or whoever it is that has the rights) to sell their tracks via whole albums only. While, browsing the store, I've come across a lot of tracks that I couldn't buy unless I were to buy the entire album. (which is a shame, because, in many instances, they would have at least gotten their share of 99 cents out of me)
Maybe?
Check it out: http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/
Doesn't mean it has to be Good vs. Evil.
Fights can be Evil vs. Evil, too.