The cuts reflect a change in emphasis away from robotic technology and toward human exploration of space.... and human exploration of space where we push to new frontiers was of course never aided tremendously by state of the art robotic technology and research.:-p This is the Jet Propulsion Labs. Even to a layman, the generic name should tell a bit of how important it is, even for human exploration of space.
One more thing... Yes, these may require an MSDN subsricption which cost money and exclude pirates, but they were always pirated anyway, and will be in the future. So the "talk" of that build will happen among pirates anyway, and it doesn't make much sense to mean a leak to happen right before a released build on MSDN.
Yes, that makes sense, but the only problem in this case is that Microsoft will release an official Community Tech Preview of a slightly more recent build this month anyway. Maybe in a week or two, or so. So it doesn't really make sense when they're already going to start releasing monthly builds.
Are these leaks accidental, or is Microsoft actually trying to pull a 360?
Well, Microsoft has at least been reported to be on the hunt of the employee doing this, according to reports from the warez people involved in the leak. They wanted their IRC logs too.;-) They weren't really *that* interested in the ones on the receiving end, but rather how it left MS in the first place. And the MS employee leaking another even earlir version of Longhorn (build 3683?) was fired, actually.
Make out what you wish from that, but if it's a conspiracy, I guess it just grew a lot bigger.
Instead of before, when their software running in VM's had to use a license for your physical processors (and these could be many), they can now use another (cheaper) license for the virtual processor. For people using their software in VM's this should usually be a good thing, although there are exceptions given.
Here's a quote: (bolding mine since it's vital; it's not like you could just skip licensing before, you had to go for a more expensive model of licensing for all your processors... now you only need for the VM "processor")
One change will let users who buy SQL Server, BizTalk Server and other Microsoft server software under a per-processor model license the products according to the number of virtualized processors they actually use, instead of the number of physical processors in their boxes.
And here's the case when it'll end up more expensive:
But there are cases where companies could wind up paying more money under the new model, Park said. For example, if a user runs six virtual instances of a product such as BizTalk Server on a four-processor box, it would have to pay for six BizTalk licenses
And what's this about terminal servers? A terminal server isn't even a VM.
It is a big deal, because directed advertising is more profitable. And because it's more profitable there will be more of it.
It's hard to say how much more though. If it gets too much, profitability will drop again (we aren't usually golden cash cows). And irrelevant ads will largely go away, causing a drop. Will the increased amount of targetted ads only increase to even things up again to same levels as before? I think that's hard to speculate in.
Also, directed advertising is harder to ignore. The more they know about how your brain works the better they'll be able to create ads that draw your attention to them.
Has any research actually been done about this? It would be interesting to hear about, because I can honestly not seeing that happen when I'm browsing the internet and have targetted ads thrown at me, for example when I use Gmail and see ads related to what a friend wrote. Heck, even the ads on Slashdot are trying to match our geeky interests reasonably well (I see a ThinkGeek one now for some peculiar gadget), but I can't remember when I last clicked on one.
By the way, for the record I was speaking of MAIL here, not e-mail. I usually get local ads via mail, not e-mail. That's rather the land of viagra and so on.:-)
Personally I prefer not to receive ANY ads by e-mail
Of course. That goes without saying.
That's why I said "if I have to live with ads". I assumed that they aren't going to cease all advertisement tomorrow or so.
Because this will only mean that e-mail advertising will become more effective, thus more profitable, which makes it highly likely that we're gonna receive more of it than ever before!
You can turn that argument and say they today need to pump out much more ads to reach their proper audiences since they aren't too sure about which one it is.
Here's a short list of things that you might not want everyone knowing:
What do you mean with "everyone"? This is just for the involved store, right?
As I said before, if this info is publicized or shared, it's a completely other problem and I do believe it shouldn't be shared.
And no, I wouldn't mind the store I shop from knowing my drinking habits. I have nothing to hide, I'm no alcoholic, if they see I indeed prefer a brand of beer over any cider, big deal?
Similarly, if they see me preferring sci-fi books over cooking books, what about it?
The only times there are problems I can see with this is if they somehow share this data with others.
No, they can't be used against me by my employer or insurance company if the data isn't shared. But sharing is a separate issue not connected to RFID tag technology, or RFID at all. It's about laws guarding your personal privacy.
Like with Google ads, if I have to live with ads, I much prefer directed ones with at least some research behind them than undirected ones. In other words -- in this case with shoes, if they wished to send me ads by mail, I'd rather only get ads for men in my age than women and kids.
Of course, connecting these studies to other databases from other companies could make it very wrong, but that's another problem I think need other laws (unless there aren't any already -- IANAL).
And at least where I live, there are already laws against storing personally identifiable data in a database, such as your social security number. I guess age, gender, and other purely statistical data don't fall under this law, and I don't see a compelling reason to why it should. Is it really such a big deal?
First, it's better to surprise a customer with something better than expected.
CNET News has a good point about this though, in that new owners hearing of this and being among the "unlucky" may complain about it, since they know there are betters setups out there, of the same model. And even if they don't, they certainly won't belong to the positively surprised crowd. I'm not sure singling out users on random with computers even using the same part number to confuse the retailers is such a good idea, especially when done silently from Apple's part.
Slashdot Mirror
His point is that :wZZ isn't exactly the first key salute a novice thinks of to save & exit. ;-)
Nowhere in the article does it say Google fails to comply on their request of removing the imagery.
Is this once again a case where a gov't goes to whine for the media before finishing an agreement with Google?
It certainly seems so, as the latter with Google refusing to cooperate would have been far greater news.
... was it worth it?
The same question can be asked movie goers, or people interested in soccer games.
Was going there to watch worth it?
It's a matter of your tastes and preferences for entertainment.
Why are you so interested in what kind of entertainment people like?
The cuts reflect a change in emphasis away from robotic technology and toward human exploration of space. ... and human exploration of space where we push to new frontiers was of course never aided tremendously by state of the art robotic technology and research. :-p This is the Jet Propulsion Labs. Even to a layman, the generic name should tell a bit of how important it is, even for human exploration of space.
See this one -- History of Microsoft Windows -- for a little less ads. :-)
No Bill Gates speculating in the future though.
[friendsofscience.org]
:p
Now there you have a good site unbiased both ways...
It's actually rather similar to how the EU made Microsoft sell their Windows XP "N Edition". (the Windows XP lacking a Media Player)
Of course, no retailer in their right mind tried to sell it, as it was just lacking something XP had for no other benefits.
It ended up as a curiosity created by the EU that no one use.
Likewise, I have to wonder how the EU is going to get ISP's to "sell" their Internet.
One more thing... Yes, these may require an MSDN subsricption which cost money and exclude pirates, but they were always pirated anyway, and will be in the future. So the "talk" of that build will happen among pirates anyway, and it doesn't make much sense to mean a leak to happen right before a released build on MSDN.
Yes, that makes sense, but the only problem in this case is that Microsoft will release an official Community Tech Preview of a slightly more recent build this month anyway. Maybe in a week or two, or so. So it doesn't really make sense when they're already going to start releasing monthly builds.
I want to know about the OS.
I don't know how many times I've posted this by now, but here goes again:
- Vista 'known features' overview
- Vista editions
Are these leaks accidental, or is Microsoft actually trying to pull a 360?
;-) They weren't really *that* interested in the ones on the receiving end, but rather how it left MS in the first place. And the MS employee leaking another even earlir version of Longhorn (build 3683?) was fired, actually.
Well, Microsoft has at least been reported to be on the hunt of the employee doing this, according to reports from the warez people involved in the leak. They wanted their IRC logs too.
Make out what you wish from that, but if it's a conspiracy, I guess it just grew a lot bigger.
Google Wants a Piece of AOL?
Heh, the obvious title to me was rather:
Google Wants a Piece of Shit?
Yes, but we can't use the word "patents" now as it's an IBM friendly day today. :-)
Let me guess... Mr. Sweaty Armpits is backing these guys?
1MegaBot == 1024*1024 bots.
No!! You're talking about a MebiBot!
RTFA.
Instead of before, when their software running in VM's had to use a license for your physical processors (and these could be many), they can now use another (cheaper) license for the virtual processor. For people using their software in VM's this should usually be a good thing, although there are exceptions given.
Here's a quote: (bolding mine since it's vital; it's not like you could just skip licensing before, you had to go for a more expensive model of licensing for all your processors... now you only need for the VM "processor")
One change will let users who buy SQL Server, BizTalk Server and other Microsoft server software under a per-processor model license the products according to the number of virtualized processors they actually use, instead of the number of physical processors in their boxes.
And here's the case when it'll end up more expensive:
But there are cases where companies could wind up paying more money under the new model, Park said. For example, if a user runs six virtual instances of a product such as BizTalk Server on a four-processor box, it would have to pay for six BizTalk licenses
And what's this about terminal servers? A terminal server isn't even a VM.
It is a big deal, because directed advertising is more profitable.
And because it's more profitable there will be more of it.
It's hard to say how much more though. If it gets too much, profitability will drop again (we aren't usually golden cash cows). And irrelevant ads will largely go away, causing a drop. Will the increased amount of targetted ads only increase to even things up again to same levels as before? I think that's hard to speculate in.
Also, directed advertising is harder to ignore. The more they know about how your brain works the better they'll be able to create ads that draw your attention to them.
Has any research actually been done about this? It would be interesting to hear about, because I can honestly not seeing that happen when I'm browsing the internet and have targetted ads thrown at me, for example when I use Gmail and see ads related to what a friend wrote. Heck, even the ads on Slashdot are trying to match our geeky interests reasonably well (I see a ThinkGeek one now for some peculiar gadget), but I can't remember when I last clicked on one.
By the way, for the record I was speaking of MAIL here, not e-mail. :-)
I usually get local ads via mail, not e-mail. That's rather the land of viagra and so on.
Personally I prefer not to receive ANY ads by e-mail
Of course. That goes without saying.
That's why I said "if I have to live with ads".
I assumed that they aren't going to cease all advertisement tomorrow or so.
Because this will only mean that e-mail advertising will become more effective, thus more profitable, which makes it highly likely that we're gonna receive more of it than ever before!
You can turn that argument and say they today need to pump out much more ads to reach their proper audiences since they aren't too sure about which one it is.
Here's a short list of things that you might not want everyone knowing:
What do you mean with "everyone"? This is just for the involved store, right?
As I said before, if this info is publicized or shared, it's a completely other problem and I do believe it shouldn't be shared.
And no, I wouldn't mind the store I shop from knowing my drinking habits.
I have nothing to hide, I'm no alcoholic, if they see I indeed prefer a brand of beer over any cider, big deal?
Similarly, if they see me preferring sci-fi books over cooking books, what about it?
The only times there are problems I can see with this is if they somehow share this data with others.
No, they can't be used against me by my employer or insurance company if the data isn't shared.
But sharing is a separate issue not connected to RFID tag technology, or RFID at all.
It's about laws guarding your personal privacy.
What's so bad about studying them?
Like with Google ads, if I have to live with ads, I much prefer directed ones with at least some research behind them than undirected ones. In other words -- in this case with shoes, if they wished to send me ads by mail, I'd rather only get ads for men in my age than women and kids.
Of course, connecting these studies to other databases from other companies could make it very wrong, but that's another problem I think need other laws (unless there aren't any already -- IANAL).
And at least where I live, there are already laws against storing personally identifiable data in a database, such as your social security number. I guess age, gender, and other purely statistical data don't fall under this law, and I don't see a compelling reason to why it should. Is it really such a big deal?
Isn't there online photo services where you live? :-S
You know, where you upload your stuff and get it delivered?
I agree there's still the delays involved though.
Yes, assuming you keep migrating the media to new formats and they don't go back due to lack of quality.
First, it's better to surprise a customer with something better than expected.
CNET News has a good point about this though, in that new owners hearing of this and being among the "unlucky" may complain about it, since they know there are betters setups out there, of the same model. And even if they don't, they certainly won't belong to the positively surprised crowd. I'm not sure singling out users on random with computers even using the same part number to confuse the retailers is such a good idea, especially when done silently from Apple's part.
The submitter has a spouse!
The Slashdot standards aren't what they used to be. *shakes head*