Just think, I can get a phone for $10 (39.95 up here in Canada of course) and I won't need my Palm anymore. Just a good ol' bic pen and I can just jot notes down on the back of the phone.
Of course, this also means that instead of those stupid subcription cards falling out of magazines I can look forward to seeing these babies scattered all over the isle in the 7-11.
liB
A different approach to analysis
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 2
Okay, there's been a million theories at to what IT is and why so how about a slightly different approach. Let's look at what is proposed as IT and see how well they mesh with what's been leaked so far as information goes.
Personal Helicopter
Personal helicopters are somewhat available today (Kamen uses one himself) so there's no real need to retro-fit a city or campus to accomodate one. Besides, I think humans have enough trouble navigating 2D space, let alone 3D space. And besides making leaps of technological advances in propulsion systems to support such a device, I sure wouldn't have a warm gushy feeling in my tummy that my neighbor could slice and dice me with his "transportation device". Gives a whole new meaning to road rage.
Modified iBOT (wheelchair)
Based on the fact that the first point in one of the articles says it is not a medical device, I think we can safeley rule out a wheelchair or wheelchair like device for getting around. Besides, I can't see the masses accepting this as an alternative to get to work in.
Personal Jetpack
I can't see a device like this sweeping the planet, even if it is cheap. It's hard enough to convince a business exec to strap on a helmet to ride a bike to work let alone a jetpack. Again we have the 3D space navigation problem and again, there's no retro-fitting needed for a device like this so I don't see it meshing with the info that's out there.
Scooter
Nothing fun here. These things are just as dangerous as current travel methods and I can't see anyone laughing if one of these (motorized or electronicized) was turned on. Also, these exist all over the place in non-motorized form and I don't see any city, campus or facility leaping to retro-fit their world.
Which leads to..
Hover Device
This is my choice for what I think it could be. Why? Simple. Imagine a simple device that would be personal and compact. No real big change in how cities operate but you could alter sidewalks to accept these much like walking paths are now altered to accept bikes and humans. Getting to work would be just like walking, except you wouldn't be walking but sitting down and navigating. The execution could be simple through the use of Kamens previous patents. He has a device to adjust trim via a joystick device. So what's easier to use than that? Tilt forward to move forward, left to move left, right to move right. Trim is automatically adjusted to the terrain (and you're only a few inches/feet off the ground so it's not a lot of adjustment). The device could be assembled quickly from a compact set of bags, no argument there (see images below on how compact it would be). It certainly would be fun because its just like riding bumper cars at the fair (hopefully without the bumper aspect though). I sure would laugh seeing one fired up as it lifts off the ground. Are people going to be allowed to use it? This is an interesting controversy. Why can't they use it? Licensing? A bike/car/helicopter would certainly need some kind of licensing if it follows the rules of the road. A hover device wouldn't since it really is just an alternate to walking and thus is executed on the streets and takes up no less space than a human being. The restricted use might be imposed at an age level. Not available for people under 16 much like mopeds are now. An alternate to [cars] especially for people in cities. Well, I can tell you that I would jump at the chance to save the $15/day parking if I could get to work using such a device and I'm sure others would agree. If that's all you use your car for, why not? It certainly wouldn't put automakers out of business but it would affect them greatly. Imagine you still have a car but only use it 2 or 3 times a month for large hauls or long trips. Otherwise you get around with your IT. Maintenance, oil and gas costs would be reduced. The life of the car would be extended and automakers would see less people buying cars less frequently.
I've included a sketch here of what it might look like and how it would be constructed (this is really rough but you should get the idea).
Well, there's been quite a bit of hype and discussion over this so here's my 2 cents.
There seems to be a general consensus that IT is some kind of personal or portable transportation device (Individual Transportation?) based on the fact that Kamen is pretty much centric on creating things to help people get around. Sifting through the article gives us a lot of clues that may be read various ways but here's my take on them:
In a private meeting with Bezos, Jobs and Doerr, Kamen assembled two Gingers -- or ITs -- in 10 minutes, using a screwdriver and hex wrenches from components that fit into a couple of large duffel bags and some cardboard boxes.
Clearly indicates something portable and can be easily put together quickly with a minumum of tools. Remember Little Netty (I think that was the name) of the helicopter in one of the James Bond movies? She came in a few duffle bags and was assembled in a few minutes. So I can imagine a personal transportation device that can be driven to work, disassembled into a duffle bag and stored under your cubicle until 5:00pm. No parking hassles.
The invention has a fun element to it, because once a Ginger was turned on, Bezos started laughing his "loud, honking laugh".
Not sure how to read this. How could a scooter/car/whatever be fun? Perhaps the mention of a hover device awhile ago (they've been available for years) could look 'fun' when activated.
There are possibly two Ginger models, named Metro and Pro -- and the Metro may possibly cost less than $2,000.
Again going on the transportation idea, a Metro model (Metro for Metropolois? City) vs Pro for long distance trips?
Bezos is quoted as saying that IT "...is a product so revolutionary, you'll have no problem selling it. The question is, are people going to be allowed to use it?"
Currently, you have to be licensed to drive and in most areas, licensed to operate any kind of motor vehicle. Hmmm...
Jobs is quoted as saying: "...If enough people see the machine you won't have to convince them to architect cities around it. It'll just happen."
This currently happens with bicycles. They create new bike paths or alter roadways to accomodate cyclists. Could happen with a motor device that doesn't operate at high speeds like a car.
according to Kamen, "have a big, broad impact not only on social institutions but some billion-dollar old-line companies."
Big shot at the big three (well, they were the big three motor companies). So a device to put all gas-combustion companies to shame?
"profoundly affect our environment and the way people live worldwide. It will be an alternative to products that are dirty, expensive, sometimes dangerous and often frustrating, especially for people in the cities."
They keep pushing the city angle, which we know is the key issue with gridlock. Cars are indeed dirty, expensive and sometimes dangerous (but then so is the average Windows program)
IT will be a mass-market consumer product "likely to run afoul of existing regulations and or inspire new ones," according to Kemper. The invention will also likely require "meeting with city planners, regulators, legislators, large commercial companies and university presidents about how cities, companies and campuses can be retro-fitted for Ginger."
Again, just screams of dealing with a new transportation device. Look at how campuses have accomodated cyclists converting old walkways into bicycle paths. Now they might have to deal with this!
Kamen fears, as he states in a letter to Kemper that is included in the proposal, that "huge corporations" might catch wind of the invention and "use their massive resources to erect obstacles against us...
This would be typical of big car companies to work heavy handed agains the little guy. Remember the Tucker? A revolutionary car in every aspect, but was shut down by the big three before the first production run. I know, any company can use tactics like this, but it is typical of large companies when their primary bread-winner is at risk.
Sure, this response is transportation centric but I do feel, based on Kamen's past inventions (there are quite a few, including a wheel-chair that can climb stairs) that this is a natural next step for him. As for Jobs and Bezos, these guys just live for this type of innovative technology so it's only natural for them to be involved.
It seems Apple is more upset at using the trademarked logo than the actual theme. Personally I don't think the look and feel is IP (and the courts didn't either back in the 80's). However, what about the Apple logo/. is using for posting this story? Is that not doing the same thing as these themes are? Does/. have permission from Apple to reproduce the logo?
As pointed out, the TOS for this ISP clearly says "4.1.5. The storage and distribution of MP3 format files via the Company network is prohibited." So, the user has nothing to complain about having his files deleted if this was the policy when he signed up for an account. Of course, nobody reads the TOS' and it's a whole 'nuther can of worms if they changed the TOS after he signed up and didn't inform him.
Also, someone mentioned zipping up the files means that they're not in error now because the format changed. No. The format of the MP3 hasn't changed, it's still an MP3 not matter if it's zipped, tar'd, rar'd or otherwise packaged up. The only way you could get around this was to convert the MP3s to WAV format or something, since the TOS is very specific about the file format. This might beg the question, what if I write a game and package it up but it uses MP3 files for music. Am I allowed to distribute it on an ISP that doesn't allow the distribution of MP3 files? Hard to say.
I think the main guffaw here is that the ISP should have the courtesy to email the user informing him of what happened and why. Otherwise, an unsuspecting user could think his site was hacked or something. Of course, the ISP doesn't have any requirement to do this and any ISP that doesn't wouldn't be my ISP for long.
The format they discuss on the LizardTech page is for both an image and a document format. The DjVu format is really just a new document format for viewing, you guessed it, documents (which includes images). This isn't a new image format that will replace GIF, PNG or JPG. It's just another way to put together documents (as if we don't have enough formats out there for this). They also have an image format that is more compact than other ones, but I doubt it will become a standard of any kind.
Now the claims on the document format bother me. First, they compare it against PDF which we all know is large and bloated to begin with. Sure, if I took any document and separated out the text and formatting and images, compressed it down I'd probably have a "new" revolutionary document format. Doesn't this just sound like HTML? I've written server side scripts and client applets that will compress HTML the same way, and I think my results would be about the same as this (and perhaps faster?). You'll still need their plug-in to view their documents. They also say that a 2.5gb TIFF is compressed down to 3mb. Wow. I can do that now if I convert the TIFF to JPEG with little loss of quality. I really don't see what the big deal is about.
I wish the/. reporters would do a little research before they go posting messages that send the readers into a frenzy of clicking and sending off emails to friends about the next wave sweeping the internet.
I'm all for abandonware sites, don't get me wrong. I also agree that they are in fact violating some rights of the original authors. I don't think anyone can dispute that.
So with that in mind, why not a proposal that abandonware sites, instead of blatently putting up software for download, contact the original companies/copyright holders/authors for permission.
Herein lies the rock and a hard place problem. In some cases, (perhaps most) the original authors are gone off the face of the planet. Many software companies from the 80s that had one hit wonders are gone, never to be seen again in the gaming industry. So what about their products? Who owns them. Also, there is the fact (coming from experience) that some companies ignore any requests for copies of the software, permission to put the software up for downloads or even releasing the software to the public domain. They simply don't bother answering some of us and in some cases even deny they created the software in the first place.
I think there's problems on both fronts. The abdonware sites would do well to try to contact the original authors and make a proposal to make the software available to the public, even linking to the new site if possible. The software companies would do well to start releasing games into the public domain or releasing the source under a GPL (or similar) license so people could build new versions and the life-cycle continues on.
Instead these kind of things happen, sites get shut down and nobody benefits. Why can't we all get along? It seems so simple.
liB
Method and system for automagically forwarding a user from one URL to another via a web browser.
Abstract
A method and system for automagically forwarding a user from one website to another via a web browser. The user enters a website either from a fully qualified URL or from a link on another webpage. Described in the header of the web page is a definable time before the forwarding action takes place. The user is then whisked away to a new URL without any control over where he's going or what content may pop up at the new site. The new site may contain dozens of advertising pop-ups or annoying banners that the user must close to continue his regular browsing. Content authors may simply forward the user to a random website that bears no resemblance or signifigance to the original site whatsoever. Different web browsers may implement this functionality as they see fit, inserting extra pop-up ads for various Microsoft products if the timeout value is set too low.
See also patent #23537432 - "Browser Incompatibility Script Patent" and #577538743 - "Pop-ups from Hell Patent" for additional details.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, this also means that instead of those stupid subcription cards falling out of magazines I can look forward to seeing these babies scattered all over the isle in the 7-11.
liB
Personal Helicopter
Personal helicopters are somewhat available today (Kamen uses one himself) so there's no real need to retro-fit a city or campus to accomodate one. Besides, I think humans have enough trouble navigating 2D space, let alone 3D space. And besides making leaps of technological advances in propulsion systems to support such a device, I sure wouldn't have a warm gushy feeling in my tummy that my neighbor could slice and dice me with his "transportation device". Gives a whole new meaning to road rage.
Modified iBOT (wheelchair)
Based on the fact that the first point in one of the articles says it is not a medical device, I think we can safeley rule out a wheelchair or wheelchair like device for getting around. Besides, I can't see the masses accepting this as an alternative to get to work in.
Personal Jetpack
I can't see a device like this sweeping the planet, even if it is cheap. It's hard enough to convince a business exec to strap on a helmet to ride a bike to work let alone a jetpack. Again we have the 3D space navigation problem and again, there's no retro-fitting needed for a device like this so I don't see it meshing with the info that's out there.
Scooter
Nothing fun here. These things are just as dangerous as current travel methods and I can't see anyone laughing if one of these (motorized or electronicized) was turned on. Also, these exist all over the place in non-motorized form and I don't see any city, campus or facility leaping to retro-fit their world.
Which leads to..
Hover Device
This is my choice for what I think it could be. Why? Simple. Imagine a simple device that would be personal and compact. No real big change in how cities operate but you could alter sidewalks to accept these much like walking paths are now altered to accept bikes and humans. Getting to work would be just like walking, except you wouldn't be walking but sitting down and navigating. The execution could be simple through the use of Kamens previous patents. He has a device to adjust trim via a joystick device. So what's easier to use than that? Tilt forward to move forward, left to move left, right to move right. Trim is automatically adjusted to the terrain (and you're only a few inches/feet off the ground so it's not a lot of adjustment). The device could be assembled quickly from a compact set of bags, no argument there (see images below on how compact it would be). It certainly would be fun because its just like riding bumper cars at the fair (hopefully without the bumper aspect though). I sure would laugh seeing one fired up as it lifts off the ground. Are people going to be allowed to use it? This is an interesting controversy. Why can't they use it? Licensing? A bike/car/helicopter would certainly need some kind of licensing if it follows the rules of the road. A hover device wouldn't since it really is just an alternate to walking and thus is executed on the streets and takes up no less space than a human being. The restricted use might be imposed at an age level. Not available for people under 16 much like mopeds are now. An alternate to [cars] especially for people in cities. Well, I can tell you that I would jump at the chance to save the $15/day parking if I could get to work using such a device and I'm sure others would agree. If that's all you use your car for, why not? It certainly wouldn't put automakers out of business but it would affect them greatly. Imagine you still have a car but only use it 2 or 3 times a month for large hauls or long trips. Otherwise you get around with your IT. Maintenance, oil and gas costs would be reduced. The life of the car would be extended and automakers would see less people buying cars less frequently.
I've included a sketch here of what it might look like and how it would be constructed (this is really rough but you should get the idea).
liB
There seems to be a general consensus that IT is some kind of personal or portable transportation device (Individual Transportation?) based on the fact that Kamen is pretty much centric on creating things to help people get around. Sifting through the article gives us a lot of clues that may be read various ways but here's my take on them:
In a private meeting with Bezos, Jobs and Doerr, Kamen assembled two Gingers -- or ITs -- in 10 minutes, using a screwdriver and hex wrenches from components that fit into a couple of large duffel bags and some cardboard boxes.
Clearly indicates something portable and can be easily put together quickly with a minumum of tools. Remember Little Netty (I think that was the name) of the helicopter in one of the James Bond movies? She came in a few duffle bags and was assembled in a few minutes. So I can imagine a personal transportation device that can be driven to work, disassembled into a duffle bag and stored under your cubicle until 5:00pm. No parking hassles.
The invention has a fun element to it, because once a Ginger was turned on, Bezos started laughing his "loud, honking laugh".
Not sure how to read this. How could a scooter/car/whatever be fun? Perhaps the mention of a hover device awhile ago (they've been available for years) could look 'fun' when activated.
There are possibly two Ginger models, named Metro and Pro -- and the Metro may possibly cost less than $2,000.
Again going on the transportation idea, a Metro model (Metro for Metropolois? City) vs Pro for long distance trips?
Bezos is quoted as saying that IT "...is a product so revolutionary, you'll have no problem selling it. The question is, are people going to be allowed to use it?"
Currently, you have to be licensed to drive and in most areas, licensed to operate any kind of motor vehicle. Hmmm...
Jobs is quoted as saying: "...If enough people see the machine you won't have to convince them to architect cities around it. It'll just happen."
This currently happens with bicycles. They create new bike paths or alter roadways to accomodate cyclists. Could happen with a motor device that doesn't operate at high speeds like a car.
according to Kamen, "have a big, broad impact not only on social institutions but some billion-dollar old-line companies."
Big shot at the big three (well, they were the big three motor companies). So a device to put all gas-combustion companies to shame?
"profoundly affect our environment and the way people live worldwide. It will be an alternative to products that are dirty, expensive, sometimes dangerous and often frustrating, especially for people in the cities."
They keep pushing the city angle, which we know is the key issue with gridlock. Cars are indeed dirty, expensive and sometimes dangerous (but then so is the average Windows program)
IT will be a mass-market consumer product "likely to run afoul of existing regulations and or inspire new ones," according to Kemper. The invention will also likely require "meeting with city planners, regulators, legislators, large commercial companies and university presidents about how cities, companies and campuses can be retro-fitted for Ginger."
Again, just screams of dealing with a new transportation device. Look at how campuses have accomodated cyclists converting old walkways into bicycle paths. Now they might have to deal with this!
Kamen fears, as he states in a letter to Kemper that is included in the proposal, that "huge corporations" might catch wind of the invention and "use their massive resources to erect obstacles against us...
This would be typical of big car companies to work heavy handed agains the little guy. Remember the Tucker? A revolutionary car in every aspect, but was shut down by the big three before the first production run. I know, any company can use tactics like this, but it is typical of large companies when their primary bread-winner is at risk.
Sure, this response is transportation centric but I do feel, based on Kamen's past inventions (there are quite a few, including a wheel-chair that can climb stairs) that this is a natural next step for him. As for Jobs and Bezos, these guys just live for this type of innovative technology so it's only natural for them to be involved.
liB
Damn! Amazing how we've progressed since then. I'm lucky if Unreal Tournament can load in 45 seconds or less.
Oh wait...
liB
Also, someone mentioned zipping up the files means that they're not in error now because the format changed. No. The format of the MP3 hasn't changed, it's still an MP3 not matter if it's zipped, tar'd, rar'd or otherwise packaged up. The only way you could get around this was to convert the MP3s to WAV format or something, since the TOS is very specific about the file format. This might beg the question, what if I write a game and package it up but it uses MP3 files for music. Am I allowed to distribute it on an ISP that doesn't allow the distribution of MP3 files? Hard to say.
I think the main guffaw here is that the ISP should have the courtesy to email the user informing him of what happened and why. Otherwise, an unsuspecting user could think his site was hacked or something. Of course, the ISP doesn't have any requirement to do this and any ISP that doesn't wouldn't be my ISP for long.
liB
Now the claims on the document format bother me. First, they compare it against PDF which we all know is large and bloated to begin with. Sure, if I took any document and separated out the text and formatting and images, compressed it down I'd probably have a "new" revolutionary document format. Doesn't this just sound like HTML? I've written server side scripts and client applets that will compress HTML the same way, and I think my results would be about the same as this (and perhaps faster?). You'll still need their plug-in to view their documents. They also say that a 2.5gb TIFF is compressed down to 3mb. Wow. I can do that now if I convert the TIFF to JPEG with little loss of quality. I really don't see what the big deal is about.
I wish the /. reporters would do a little research before they go posting messages that send the readers into a frenzy of clicking and sending off emails to friends about the next wave sweeping the internet.
liB
I'm all for abandonware sites, don't get me wrong. I also agree that they are in fact violating some rights of the original authors. I don't think anyone can dispute that. So with that in mind, why not a proposal that abandonware sites, instead of blatently putting up software for download, contact the original companies/copyright holders/authors for permission. Herein lies the rock and a hard place problem. In some cases, (perhaps most) the original authors are gone off the face of the planet. Many software companies from the 80s that had one hit wonders are gone, never to be seen again in the gaming industry. So what about their products? Who owns them. Also, there is the fact (coming from experience) that some companies ignore any requests for copies of the software, permission to put the software up for downloads or even releasing the software to the public domain. They simply don't bother answering some of us and in some cases even deny they created the software in the first place. I think there's problems on both fronts. The abdonware sites would do well to try to contact the original authors and make a proposal to make the software available to the public, even linking to the new site if possible. The software companies would do well to start releasing games into the public domain or releasing the source under a GPL (or similar) license so people could build new versions and the life-cycle continues on. Instead these kind of things happen, sites get shut down and nobody benefits. Why can't we all get along? It seems so simple. liB
Abstract
A method and system for automagically forwarding a user from one website to another via a web browser. The user enters a website either from a fully qualified URL or from a link on another webpage. Described in the header of the web page is a definable time before the forwarding action takes place. The user is then whisked away to a new URL without any control over where he's going or what content may pop up at the new site. The new site may contain dozens of advertising pop-ups or annoying banners that the user must close to continue his regular browsing. Content authors may simply forward the user to a random website that bears no resemblance or signifigance to the original site whatsoever. Different web browsers may implement this functionality as they see fit, inserting extra pop-up ads for various Microsoft products if the timeout value is set too low.
See also patent #23537432 - "Browser Incompatibility Script Patent" and #577538743 - "Pop-ups from Hell Patent" for additional details.