iTunes? Is anyone still using that old thing? I now exclusively use Songbird
I tried to install Songbird, but it just installed a buggy, broken and cluttered version of iTunes that didn't work with my iPod and had a farting bird for an icon. Does anyone know where the real installer is?
Improved anti-depressant treatments are nice and all, but how about a treatment for the source of the problem: the bully.
I would assume that mice don't have quite the nuanced and varied social life that we humans have, so it's easy to describe their social dominance and submission as "bullying", but I pointed out in another comment that "bullying" isn't the only way to interpret "social defeat". Potentially any particularly painful or embarassing situation in which you feel inferior may "encode" the same way in memory.
While I certainly don't disagree with the idea of addressing the causes of "real" bullying, I just wanted to point out that in many cases of social withdrawal and phobia there may not be a bully.
While I'm at it, here are some more quotation marks: " " " " " "
Why it always assumed that social withdrawal is a sign of individual sickness - but not the group itself which should stand in judgement?
I suspect because it's a lot easier to treat individuals who seek help than to attempt to alter the way that all people interact with one another. In an ideal world perhaps it would be easy to fundamentally alter human nature, but in this world it's easier to attempt to treat people that have suffered exceptionally because of it.
What was shown in this article (which most people responding don't seem to have read) was that past experiences of social defeat cause an expectation of future social defeat, and that there is a chemical basis for this.
While it makes for a nice headline, "social defeat" doesn't just mean bullying. In humans it can easily apply to a wide variety of painful or embarassing situations, which may or may not come from intentional acts by other people. If subjected to enough situations like this, the brain learns to expect more of the same, which can manifest itself in social withrawal, passivity, selective mutism, or many other problems. These reactions in turn can lead to further feeling of social defeat, which just reinforces the problem.
This is my interpretation as someone with a serious social withdrawal problem who finds this article very reassuring.
because lets face it creativity is often driven by depression and despair
There may be people who did wonderful creative things in spite of being horribly depressed, but by no means does that mean that it was driven by depression. There are far more people driven into crippling alcoholism or suicide than to do great creative things. Furthermore, there are more people who have done great creative things who weren't depressed. Some of them were even (gasp!) medicated!
Yes, our society is over-medicated, and yes, it's disgusting that schools are starting to dictate who is to be medicated, but the attitude that "depression is a good thing because it allows you to be creative" is fashionable nonsense that I believe has done more harm than good.
Everything I've seen suggests that Vista's display system is technologically better (resolution indepependent, for example).
The fact that Microsoft's display tech will be marginally ahead by the end of this year does not invalidate the fact that it has been laughably behind for the past five, which I believe was the point being made.
So, can someone in the know tell me if there really are gaming elements within this thing?
The games are all "in-game", and user-created. There are FPS areas, RPG areas, air-to-air combat, and so on, all implemented through the built-in scripting system. That said, most of the world consists of shopping malls, casinos, clubs, and people's houses. I happen to enjoy getting on every few months to just walk around and take screenshots of the incredible crap that most people like to build when given total creative freedom.
Either they have bad sources, or their sources are too good--purposely placed by Apple to misdirect the rumor sites.
You'll note that they have been consistently wrong about everything that wasn't glaringly obvious since they were sued by Apple in effort to ferret out the internal leaker. In short, they lost the one actual source they ever had.
They (rumor sites in general) make shit up, plain and simple.
Usually, when rumors don't pan out they say things like "it was delayed at the last minute", or "it was suddenly cancelled". No matter how many times they get it wrong, they claim "reliable sources". No matter how many things actually happen that they didn't know about, they always report them as if they were predictions come true. That they've managed to get people to believe that Apple deliberately sends them misinformation is all part of the calculated chicanery that keeps such sites popular and profitable.
However, that means in certain cases I have to completely bypass something I actually want.
Yes, actually, it does.
In fact, that's kind of the way money works. You really should be used to it by now, or get used to it quick. If you're able, but unwilling to pay what someone is asking for a good or service, it's fair to say that you don't want it badly enough.
the industry keeps jacking up the prices with no justification other than lining their pocket
Prices go up because people will pay it. There are people willing to pay more than $50 a month for televison. To you or I, that's fucking insane, but to them, it's worth it.
Also, is it really feasible that Google would even want to maintain a SAN Array capable of storing EVERY document for EVERY user of this thing? Why would they want to waste their money collecting everybody's garbage?
Google is one of few companies for whom this does seem feasable. Also consider that only files with indexable content would need to be stored at all (in addition to a list of files without indexable content). These would be the smallest, most compressable files.
I wouldn't say it's likely, but do remember that part of Google's primary function is the indexing and storage of large amounts of content from other sources.
i don't care if it's easy, it's obviously *possible*, so that fact that it hasn't been done is a travesty.,
This word "travesty". It does not mean what you think it means.
Assuming that you didn't mean to use it literally, you should know that "travesty" on it's own is usually meant as "travesty of justice". Surely you don't think it unjust that a company doesn't manufacture products to your specifications?
The fact that these patents were filed shows that they are working on this kind of device.
History has shown that the images in Apple's utility patent filings rarely bear direct resemblance to the devices they end up in. (And before the trolls come in: Yes this is legal and normal, as the images are only "one embodiment" of the invention being patented.)
"Gestures for touch sensitive input devices", for instance, could easily be interpreted as applying to the existing touchpads in PowerBooks and MacBooks, which are multipoint devices capable of interpeting gestures. Also the so-called "Chameleon iMac" patent seems in retrospect to describe the PowerBook's illuminated keyboard. And if I remember correctly the iPod's "Click Wheel" is covered by the patent for "Mouse with rotary dial".
I'm just saying that I wouldn't put much faith in the drawings in utility patents. The design patent you cited (which is quite clearly larger than an iPod) is much more convincing, however.
You're completely ignoring the specific thing the parent was talking about:
Stallman is repeating his behaviour with Ulrich Drepper and Glibc, here. Ergo, if the leader of a project refuses to go the way he wants them to, he will attempt to turn other people associated with the project against said project leader.
There's nothing in your post that responds to this.
However, I am wondering if the step from 2D to 3D desktop is as significant as say, going from commandline to GUI.
This kind of thing isn't really 3D. Yes, it uses 3D visual effects and all, but the overal metaphor involved is still 2D. That's why you don't see much new functionality. Even the cube-rotation virtual desktop is just a visual cue for a 2D movement. Instead of thinking "that window is on desktop #2", the user can intuit "that window is to the right of where I am now". There's still a lot of room for this kind of enhancement in current-style interfaces.
"Gamey" 3D interfaces like Looking Glass are a completely different beast, one that I hope and expect will never take off. There is just no reason to apply the environmental metaphor of the real world to things on the computer.
The very next line after the portion you quoted is this: Entrants must enter the Promotion through the iTunes Music Store accessible in your country of residence.
There's an interesting extra part to the Grand Prize, which isn't listed on the main page:
In addition, a scholarship will be created by Apple in the name of the Grand Prize winner to a world renowned music institution to be selected by Apple. The scholarship recipient shall receive four (4) years of tuition to a university-level program at the music department of the selected institution. The Grand Prize winner shall not be eligible to receive the scholarship or participate in determining the scholarship recipient. The scholarship shall have no monetary value to the Grand Prize winner. -- Official Rules
So what? When did our society define the age at which these acts should first occur? I must have missed that.
The reason this is being studied has a lot to do with the fact that earlier-than-normal puberty is becoming more common (due to diet changes, chemical exposure, or any number of unknown causes) and that our society just isn't adapted to it yet. It's already a concern from a public health standpoint, but it's only recently cought the interest of sociologists. Most of us know from experience that sexual maturity does not go hand-in-hand with emotional maturity, and so there are a lot of questions about how this will affect our society in the future.
You can go on thinking what you will about the study itself, but I think your reaction is a bit too knee-jerk to be modded "Interesting".
I don't see anything in that patent application for making a multipoint touch-sensitive device.
Um, ok. I thought that was obvious. That's probably why it's titled "Gestures for touch sensitive input devices", instead of "Multipoint touch-sensitive devices". Are you trying to imply that the patent is silly because it isn't explicitly a new bit of hardware? If so, you're probably going to have a problem with most patents.
All I can see is that they are free-riding on other companys devices with another software patent. Possibly making it harder for the true inventors to sell their devices because Apple patented the uses for them.
This is a very strange claim. Apple isn't attempting here to patent touch screen/touch pad technology, which is presumably already covered by a hojillion patents, and is a different business besides. A patent like this wouldn't stop anyone from using multipoint touch screens or touch pads in any ways other than the ways described in the appication. Similarly, I don't think that the two patents Apple already holds in this area (referenced in this application, 5,590,219:Method and apparatus for recognizing gestures on a computer system and 5,612,719:Gesture sensitive buttons for graphical user interfaces) have exactly wrecked the economy in the decade or so since they were filed.
Also, you allude to "true inventors" without giving any kind of indication as to who they might be. As certain as you seem that someone has been ripped-off, you're not very forthcoming about who you think that someone is.
You don't see anything wrong with that?
All I see here is you making up scenarios that have little to do with reality.
It sound like apple "again" is taking an already established idea, enhance it by 5% and file for a patent,
If you or anyone else were to provide a link to a touch-sensitive device with a multipoint gesture interface, you might have a point. I don't know of any such interfaces, none of the things people have been harping about have such interfaces, so where do you get the claim that this is an "established" idea?
And I'm afraid your stripes as an Apple apologist are showing.
Oh, I see. You just hate Apple. You don't actually care what the patent is about, you just want to make it known that you hate something. Well, have at it, but be aware that branding me an "apologist" because I think that you, personally, have made idiotic statements (before which I thought you were merely mistaken) doesn't actually make you any less wrong.
This is just like the pantenting of the scroll wheel; there's an obvious case of prior art (the radio dial in my old 1972 Dodge Charger for example) where a wheel moves a linear guide, but people think the patent is "new and valid" because it applies to an electronic device.
The patent application for the click wheel is far more specific than that, because the click wheel does more than that. If Apple tried to patent all wheels that operate linear controls, I would agree with you, but they have not.
Sorry... I did read the patent... and I still don't make the distinction. It's a gesture-based interface using a touch screen.
Maybe you read the title, but given that the abstract is even more specific than that, I cannot belive that you went any farther than that.
Like it or not, the prior art exists and is valid.
If you were to provide an example that actually fits the claims in the patent application, then I would probably agree with you. You have not done this.
I think it's because apple is applying for a patent on something that is pretty obvious to anybody skilled in the art, and has actually been done in about 17 other places. Just check around this story for lots of examples.
The only thing there are lots of examples of is people not reading the patent application but thinking they know what it's about anyway.
Also, what "art" does one have to be skilled in for it to be so "obvious"?
Not to mention the numerous Nintendo DS games that have this feature
The DS has, as far as I know, a single-point touch screen. The patent application is for gestures using multiple points. I don't have a DS, so tell me: can you touch the screen in two different points and have two different inputs register? Or does the cursor "leap" like most touchpads?
Black & White with a touch screen. If you've got it set up to emulate a mouse then it's actually quite fun to play with a touch screen.
If you've got it set up to emulate a mouse, then you're only using one point to make gestures. The patent application covers gestures using multiple points (like using two fingers on a touch screen or a touch pad). Black and White does not have that.
Slashdot Mirror
iTunes? Is anyone still using that old thing? I now exclusively use Songbird
I tried to install Songbird, but it just installed a buggy, broken and cluttered version of iTunes that didn't work with my iPod and had a farting bird for an icon. Does anyone know where the real installer is?
Improved anti-depressant treatments are nice and all, but how about a treatment for the source of the problem: the bully.
I would assume that mice don't have quite the nuanced and varied social life that we humans have, so it's easy to describe their social dominance and submission as "bullying", but I pointed out in another comment that "bullying" isn't the only way to interpret "social defeat". Potentially any particularly painful or embarassing situation in which you feel inferior may "encode" the same way in memory.
While I certainly don't disagree with the idea of addressing the causes of "real" bullying, I just wanted to point out that in many cases of social withdrawal and phobia there may not be a bully.
While I'm at it, here are some more quotation marks: " " " " " "
Why it always assumed that social withdrawal is a sign of individual sickness - but not the group itself which should stand in judgement?
I suspect because it's a lot easier to treat individuals who seek help than to attempt to alter the way that all people interact with one another. In an ideal world perhaps it would be easy to fundamentally alter human nature, but in this world it's easier to attempt to treat people that have suffered exceptionally because of it.
What was shown in this article (which most people responding don't seem to have read) was that past experiences of social defeat cause an expectation of future social defeat, and that there is a chemical basis for this.
While it makes for a nice headline, "social defeat" doesn't just mean bullying. In humans it can easily apply to a wide variety of painful or embarassing situations, which may or may not come from intentional acts by other people. If subjected to enough situations like this, the brain learns to expect more of the same, which can manifest itself in social withrawal, passivity, selective mutism, or many other problems. These reactions in turn can lead to further feeling of social defeat, which just reinforces the problem.
This is my interpretation as someone with a serious social withdrawal problem who finds this article very reassuring.
because lets face it creativity is often driven by depression and despair
There may be people who did wonderful creative things in spite of being horribly depressed, but by no means does that mean that it was driven by depression. There are far more people driven into crippling alcoholism or suicide than to do great creative things. Furthermore, there are more people who have done great creative things who weren't depressed. Some of them were even (gasp!) medicated!
Yes, our society is over-medicated, and yes, it's disgusting that schools are starting to dictate who is to be medicated, but the attitude that "depression is a good thing because it allows you to be creative" is fashionable nonsense that I believe has done more harm than good.
Everything I've seen suggests that Vista's display system is technologically better (resolution indepependent, for example).
The fact that Microsoft's display tech will be marginally ahead by the end of this year does not invalidate the fact that it has been laughably behind for the past five, which I believe was the point being made.
So, can someone in the know tell me if there really are gaming elements within this thing?
The games are all "in-game", and user-created. There are FPS areas, RPG areas, air-to-air combat, and so on, all implemented through the built-in scripting system. That said, most of the world consists of shopping malls, casinos, clubs, and people's houses. I happen to enjoy getting on every few months to just walk around and take screenshots of the incredible crap that most people like to build when given total creative freedom.
So, it's not really a "game", but it can be fun.
Either they have bad sources, or their sources are too good--purposely placed by Apple to misdirect the rumor sites.
You'll note that they have been consistently wrong about everything that wasn't glaringly obvious since they were sued by Apple in effort to ferret out the internal leaker. In short, they lost the one actual source they ever had.
They (rumor sites in general) make shit up, plain and simple.
Usually, when rumors don't pan out they say things like "it was delayed at the last minute", or "it was suddenly cancelled". No matter how many times they get it wrong, they claim "reliable sources". No matter how many things actually happen that they didn't know about, they always report them as if they were predictions come true. That they've managed to get people to believe that Apple deliberately sends them misinformation is all part of the calculated chicanery that keeps such sites popular and profitable.
However, that means in certain cases I have to completely bypass something I actually want.
Yes, actually, it does.
In fact, that's kind of the way money works. You really should be used to it by now, or get used to it quick.
If you're able, but unwilling to pay what someone is asking for a good or service, it's fair to say that you don't want it badly enough.
the industry keeps jacking up the prices with no justification other than lining their pocket
Prices go up because people will pay it. There are people willing to pay more than $50 a month for televison. To you or I, that's fucking insane, but to them, it's worth it.
Also, is it really feasible that Google would even want to maintain a SAN Array capable of storing EVERY document for EVERY user of this thing? Why would they want to waste their money collecting everybody's garbage?
Google is one of few companies for whom this does seem feasable. Also consider that only files with indexable content would need to be stored at all (in addition to a list of files without indexable content). These would be the smallest, most compressable files.
I wouldn't say it's likely, but do remember that part of Google's primary function is the indexing and storage of large amounts of content from other sources.
i don't care if it's easy, it's obviously *possible*, so that fact that it hasn't been done is a travesty.,
This word "travesty". It does not mean what you think it means.
Assuming that you didn't mean to use it literally, you should know that "travesty" on it's own is usually meant as "travesty of justice". Surely you don't think it unjust that a company doesn't manufacture products to your specifications?
The fact that these patents were filed shows that they are working on this kind of device.
History has shown that the images in Apple's utility patent filings rarely bear direct resemblance to the devices they end up in. (And before the trolls come in: Yes this is legal and normal, as the images are only "one embodiment" of the invention being patented.)
"Gestures for touch sensitive input devices", for instance, could easily be interpreted as applying to the existing touchpads in PowerBooks and MacBooks, which are multipoint devices capable of interpeting gestures. Also the so-called "Chameleon iMac" patent seems in retrospect to describe the PowerBook's illuminated keyboard. And if I remember correctly the iPod's "Click Wheel" is covered by the patent for "Mouse with rotary dial".
I'm just saying that I wouldn't put much faith in the drawings in utility patents. The design patent you cited (which is quite clearly larger than an iPod) is much more convincing, however.
You're completely ignoring the specific thing the parent was talking about:
Stallman is repeating his behaviour with Ulrich Drepper and Glibc, here. Ergo, if the leader of a project refuses to go the way he wants them to, he will attempt to turn other people associated with the project against said project leader.
There's nothing in your post that responds to this.
However, I am wondering if the step from 2D to 3D desktop is as significant as say, going from commandline to GUI.
This kind of thing isn't really 3D. Yes, it uses 3D visual effects and all, but the overal metaphor involved is still 2D. That's why you don't see much new functionality. Even the cube-rotation virtual desktop is just a visual cue for a 2D movement. Instead of thinking "that window is on desktop #2", the user can intuit "that window is to the right of where I am now". There's still a lot of room for this kind of enhancement in current-style interfaces.
"Gamey" 3D interfaces like Looking Glass are a completely different beast, one that I hope and expect will never take off. There is just no reason to apply the environmental metaphor of the real world to things on the computer.
It would be hot to have something named after you.
I read that about two seconds after misreading your user name as "ASSanator". Needless to say, I found it amusing.
C'mon Apple, how US-Centric are you?...
The very next line after the portion you quoted is this: Entrants must enter the Promotion through the iTunes Music Store accessible in your country of residence.
There's an interesting extra part to the Grand Prize, which isn't listed on the main page:
In addition, a scholarship will be created by Apple in the name of the Grand Prize winner to a world renowned music institution to be selected by Apple. The scholarship recipient shall receive four (4) years of tuition to a university-level program at the music department of the selected institution. The Grand Prize winner shall not be eligible to receive the scholarship or participate in determining the scholarship recipient. The scholarship shall have no monetary value to the Grand Prize winner. -- Official Rules
if I didn't love /. I'd have a life. That doesn't mean I don't think it could improve either.
Get out. Get out now. Get out while you still can. It doesn't get better, it just gets more users, and they're always still in high school.
So what? When did our society define the age at which these acts should first occur? I must have missed that.
The reason this is being studied has a lot to do with the fact that earlier-than-normal puberty is becoming more common (due to diet changes, chemical exposure, or any number of unknown causes) and that our society just isn't adapted to it yet. It's already a concern from a public health standpoint, but it's only recently cought the interest of sociologists. Most of us know from experience that sexual maturity does not go hand-in-hand with emotional maturity, and so there are a lot of questions about how this will affect our society in the future.
You can go on thinking what you will about the study itself, but I think your reaction is a bit too knee-jerk to be modded "Interesting".
I don't see anything in that patent application for making a multipoint touch-sensitive device.
Um, ok. I thought that was obvious. That's probably why it's titled "Gestures for touch sensitive input devices", instead of "Multipoint touch-sensitive devices". Are you trying to imply that the patent is silly because it isn't explicitly a new bit of hardware? If so, you're probably going to have a problem with most patents.
All I can see is that they are free-riding on other companys devices with another software patent. Possibly making it harder for the true inventors to sell their devices because Apple patented the uses for them.
This is a very strange claim. Apple isn't attempting here to patent touch screen/touch pad technology, which is presumably already covered by a hojillion patents, and is a different business besides. A patent like this wouldn't stop anyone from using multipoint touch screens or touch pads in any ways other than the ways described in the appication. Similarly, I don't think that the two patents Apple already holds in this area (referenced in this application, 5,590,219:Method and apparatus for recognizing gestures on a computer system and 5,612,719:Gesture sensitive buttons for graphical user interfaces) have exactly wrecked the economy in the decade or so since they were filed.
Also, you allude to "true inventors" without giving any kind of indication as to who they might be.
As certain as you seem that someone has been ripped-off, you're not very forthcoming about who
you think that someone is.
You don't see anything wrong with that?
All I see here is you making up scenarios that have little to do with reality.
It sound like apple "again" is taking an already established idea, enhance it by 5% and file for a patent,
If you or anyone else were to provide a link to a touch-sensitive device with a multipoint gesture interface, you might have a point. I don't know of any such interfaces, none of the things people have been harping about have such interfaces, so where do you get the claim that this is an "established" idea?
And I'm afraid your stripes as an Apple apologist are showing.
Oh, I see. You just hate Apple. You don't actually care what the patent is about, you just want to make it known that you hate something. Well, have at it, but be aware that branding me an "apologist" because I think that you, personally, have made idiotic statements (before which I thought you were merely mistaken) doesn't actually make you any less wrong.
This is just like the pantenting of the scroll wheel; there's an obvious case of prior art (the radio dial in my old 1972 Dodge Charger for example) where a wheel moves a linear guide, but people think the patent is "new and valid" because it applies to an electronic device.
The patent application for the click wheel is far more specific than that, because the click wheel does more than that. If Apple tried to patent all wheels that operate linear controls, I would agree with you, but they have not.
Sorry... I did read the patent... and I still don't make the distinction. It's a gesture-based interface using a touch screen.
Maybe you read the title, but given that the abstract is even more specific than that, I cannot belive that you went any farther than that.
Like it or not, the prior art exists and is valid.
If you were to provide an example that actually fits the claims in the patent application, then I would probably agree with you. You have not done this.
The touch screen reacts the same whether I use one finger or two.
That's because it's a single-point screen. Multiple-point touch screens (i.e. the only kind referenced by the patent application) behave differently.
The patent is vague
You've already demonstrated that you haven't read any of it. The very first claim specifies "touch sensitive device having a multipoint capability".
Besides, what's Apple going to do then? Sue the priest...
Now you're demonstrating that you are being willfully stupid.
I think it's because apple is applying for a patent on something that is pretty obvious to anybody skilled in the art, and has actually been done in about 17 other places. Just check around this story for lots of examples.
The only thing there are lots of examples of is people not reading the patent application but thinking they know what it's about anyway.
Also, what "art" does one have to be skilled in for it to be so "obvious"?
Not to mention the numerous Nintendo DS games that have this feature
The DS has, as far as I know, a single-point touch screen. The patent application is for gestures using multiple points. I don't have a DS, so tell me: can you touch the screen in two different points and have two different inputs register? Or does the cursor "leap" like most touchpads?
Black & White with a touch screen. If you've got it set up to emulate a mouse then it's actually quite fun to play with a touch screen.
If you've got it set up to emulate a mouse, then you're only using one point to make gestures. The patent application covers gestures using multiple points (like using two fingers on a touch screen or a touch pad). Black and White does not have that.