Google docs which you mentioned doesn't work well on phones and tablets but we know Google has been hit with repeated requests. Other things like calendaring and email not having the same applications is forcing custom synchronization.
Yeah, so there are plenty of lazy app developers that do a poor job, on any platform. But there are plenty of Android apps that adapt nicely to big screens (Google bought one such company for Google Docs). So even if you insist on remoting apps running on the phone itself, Android, its UI, and many apps do support it and support it well. I frequently plug my Android phone into a 24" monitor at work to do personal stuff, and with WiDi I'll be able to do that wirelessly. There just isn't any innovation there.
You tried to portray people who hold libertarian beliefs as uneducated people who blindly follow pundits: "By and large, the libertarian movement as it is popularized today is a caricature of the original libertarian movement, but populated by low information people that don't read enough, that get all their news from pundits, and who only recently in the last 8 years have taken a real interest in domestic policy and macroeconomics."
That isn't just insulting, it is factually wrong. Libertarian views today correlate with a high degree of independence, distrust of experts/pundits, and high education.
I said that mainstream popular libertarian movement, which has been defined by the Tea Party, should not be listened to, and I am correct. So far, they (the Tea Party) have been an embarrassment
The Tea Party is not a "popular libertarian movement", it is a movement under which a lot of people of many different political views came together to advocate primarily fiscal responsibility. Those views appealed to libertarians, conservatives, and many others. It was quite successful politically and threw a monkey wrench into the political arrangements of both parties, which is why Democrats demonized and stigmatized it and Republicans didn't do much to defend it.
they are mostly a reactionary element that has no real direction
If you think that libertarians are "reactionary", you really have no idea what the word means. And you should figure out whether you really want to associate yourself with the terminology used by communist and socialist revolutionaries to characterize Western democracies during the cold war.
If you weren't so fast to foe me, you might have noticed that we don't disagree with each other on those points, instead you kept in with assumptions.
We disagree on pretty much every point you have made. And if you don't want to piss off people, you shouldn't start off by insulting them.
I'd suggest that the differences between the races in school results in the U.S. have little if anything to do with inherent abilities of the races, and tons to do with people's expectations.
The one standard deviation in IQ between different "races" is no more mysterious than the one standard deviation in IQ between Anglicans and Pentecostals, or Jews and Baptists. There is no more an "inherent ability of the races" as there is an "inherent ability of religious groups". If you think such a thing exists, you are a racist.
There are still race-based differences in outcomes after school, but in the schools, we're driving toward an equilibrium.
Not significantly according to any data I have seen (c.f. for example JBHE).
Yes, and differences between groups actually are that big, as you can tell from different passing rates in various tests (see e.g., here). All people are trying to do with these adjustments is to make up for those observed big differences. One can argue about whether that is the right policy, but your arguments about "statistical significance" and "tails" miss the point.
One can easily see Android applications that fall apart completely when you move from 3.5" phone to 7" tablet. Much less if you used them on a 23" touch desktop.
Why would you want to do that? You either forward state between two separate apps, or you run the app somewhere and just connect to it from different places (cf OnLive, Google Docs). Works like a charm, and people don't think twice about it.
Forwarding sessions or apps from the phone to a desktop is something people do in a pinch for old, outdated software; it's not something anybody will do regularly in the future, and it's not needed for what's shown in that video.
Also, nowhere do I say that the libertarian movement is irrelevant. You might have read into my calling the Libertarian party inconsequential. If you think they aren't, count their successes at swaying ideology or just winning major elections.
You keep playing word games, sometimes talking about the "libertarian movement" (whatever that may be), then whether the "Libertarian party" wins elections.
Most people with libertarian views don't identify as "libertarians" or vote libertarian, just like most "atheists" don't identify as such or go to atheist meetings and most homosexuals also didn't use to identify as "homosexuals" and didn't use to go to gay hangouts. People stigmatize the names of their political opponents and eventually people react by changing names.
Many people who hold libertarian beliefs vote Republican, represented by "the Enterprisers". For better or worse, they tend to be well-informed, well-educated rich white males, with a strong interest in macroeconomics. There's a smaller group of libertarian-leaning voters voting Democrat, mostly because they dislike social conservatism even more than progressive economics.
And these voters have an impact. They prevent social conservatives and progressives from succeeding as presidential candidates in both parties. And they have successfully pushed issues such as drug legalization, gay marriage, economic liberalization and free trade, etc. And as libertarian ideas succeed, they just get co-opted by the two major parties who pretend they really always stood for these ideas in the first place, leaving libertarian groups with the next batch of controversial ideas to push.
Sorry, but your analysis of libertarianism and its demographics are just out of touch with reality. The "Libertarian party" is inconsequential, but libertarian-leaning voters are a major political force in the US today.
Your math is wrong. A difference of one sigma between two groups means that the chances that a random person from one group outperforms a random person from the other group go from 50% to about 75%. That's a big difference and doesn't just affect the tails.
Android integrates them into a complete solution: any app can share anything it likes via whatever your hardware supports. It's an integrated, general-purpose solution. It would even work for screen sharing. But, get real. These days, people give presentations in the browser, and moving the session is as simple as sharing a URL, which is the default action when you tap two Android NFC devices together.
(2) is people who don't give a f*ck about climate change. We don't give a f*ck about climate change because, while it exists, it hasn't been shown to be an actual threat and because it's going to take care of itself. The real threat is a new dark ages because Luddites take over society again.
So, the Microsoft video doesn't show something that is "better than what we have today", it just shows something that is better than what Microsoft ships today. That makes Microsoft the opposite of an innovator and leader, namely an out of touch company that is reduced to catching up.
A cursory google search reveals a ton of info from respected scientists, the vast majority of whom agree climate change is real.
Climate change is real: CO2 emissions cause warming. That's not the question anymore. The question now is whether it is harmful, whether it can be prevented, and whether the costs of preventing it are lower than the benefits. Nobody agrees on those questions.
I am getting sick and tired of treating them as serious voices instead of the petulant reality denying fools they are. Life IS about making the right tradeoffs, and I refuse to trade human life for mindless exploitation of the environment.
And I am getting sick and tired of people who gladly and blindly risk the well being and lives of millions of people because of a pet peeve, and that is what people like you are advocating.
You brought up Hitler, not me. Obama is, of course, no Hitler; Obama is a well-meaning progressive president who overpromises and overspends too much. But your comparison is food for thought, because Hitler, too, asked for powers to fix the economy, help the jobless, and improve security, and parliament granted them to him "for the good of the country".
It has withstood the light of day. Repeatedly. For approximately 20 years. To the point where the vast majority of scientists who study this stuff agree that it's the best available explanation of numerous observed changes in the climate.
It's a long ways from that observation to saying that we can or should adopt the kinds of proposals made by global warming activists.
It isn't a religious faith. Its science. Its writing on the wall, and serious people are finally starting to read it.
Helen Clark (your link) is a political scientist and left-wing politician. She is not qualified.
The people polluting the Earth are already having an impact on our weather patterns - one that has claimed lives.
Almost anything humans do claims lives: driving cars, building roads, building dams, creating new medicines, etc. Life is about making the right tradeoffs.
To break this down for you, there are three categories of people: (1) people who deny global warming, (2) people who don't give a f*ck, and (3) people who want to do something about it. If you look at it, you'll find that most people who oppose (3) are in category (2) not category (1).
You can calculate EROI for two reason: one is cost, the other is greenhouse gas emissions.
For the first, that's a calculation energy companies do in order to see whether it is profitable and competitive, and you can bet that it is. That means the EROI on shale oil can't be too far from the EROI on regular oil because otherwise it wouldn't be profitable to extract it..
To calculate greenhouse gas emissions, you need to include "self energy" as a cost. But EROI-with-self-energy is a poor measure there because big differences in EROI translate into only small differences in carbon emissions. An EROI of 1:1 emits less than twice as much carbon as an EROI of 40:1. A better measure is carbon emitted per unit energy.
By and large, the libertarian movement as it is popularized today is a caricature of the original libertarian movement, but populated by low information people that don't read enough, that get all their news from pundits, and who only recently in the last 8 years have taken a real interest in domestic policy and macroeconomics. To put it simply, they don't know what they don't know.
As opposed to the Democratic and Republican parties, who are run by saints and scholars, and whose members all have IQs upwards of a hot day in Death Valley?
I'm sorry that your political understanding is so limited that you can only think in Democratic and Republican categories, and don't understand how movements and political ideas (progressivism, Christian conservatism, libertarianism, Tea Party, etc.) function within US politics. But your ignorance doesn't make make those movements irrelevant. Modern US libertarianism represents a combination of fiscal conservatism and social liberalism that represents the preferences of many voters, and it is having an impact.
is because a bunch of squabbling companies can't agree what kind of runtime to put in the browser. So, we're stuck with JavaScript,.NET, and the JVM. How hard can it be to turn the llvm into a plugin?
I was just saying that if Republicans were interested in stopping Obama for the good of the country they would be fighting this one.
For Congress to stop a US president from doing something has a very high cost, by design. That's why it happens rarely and why most US presidents get away with a lot, even though people compile long lists of their legal and constitutional violations.
During the last negotiation they could not agree because no matter what was offered, Republicans made a pledge to NOT RAISE TAXES.
My point is this: a lot of people have no problem if nothing moves in Congress for the next four years and if Obama doesn't get any legislation passed. We don't care whether the tax cuts expire, it's not about the level of taxation. It's that passing new laws will inevitably be an opportunity for more rent seeking by special interests, hidden in laws that are thousands of pages long, and create big legal uncertainty for both individuals and businesses.
Far from "letting the country burn", stopping the president (any president) from passing new legislation for a few years is a breather the country needs, in particular after all the crap both Bush and Obama pushed through over the last decade.
We've been in the midst of an industrial revolution for a century, with constant everyday change. People today work as network engineers, software architects, GUI designers, game voice over actors, 3D designers, and in many other jobs that effectively didn't exist a few decades ago. And many of these jobs and businesses get created out of necessity by people who lose their old jobs and need to figure out new ways of making money. If a nation tries to protect its workers from this, it will fall behind as other nations take the new opportunities, create the new jobs, and out-compete it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, so there are plenty of lazy app developers that do a poor job, on any platform. But there are plenty of Android apps that adapt nicely to big screens (Google bought one such company for Google Docs). So even if you insist on remoting apps running on the phone itself, Android, its UI, and many apps do support it and support it well. I frequently plug my Android phone into a 24" monitor at work to do personal stuff, and with WiDi I'll be able to do that wirelessly. There just isn't any innovation there.
You tried to portray people who hold libertarian beliefs as uneducated people who blindly follow pundits: "By and large, the libertarian movement as it is popularized today is a caricature of the original libertarian movement, but populated by low information people that don't read enough, that get all their news from pundits, and who only recently in the last 8 years have taken a real interest in domestic policy and macroeconomics."
That isn't just insulting, it is factually wrong. Libertarian views today correlate with a high degree of independence, distrust of experts/pundits, and high education.
The Tea Party is not a "popular libertarian movement", it is a movement under which a lot of people of many different political views came together to advocate primarily fiscal responsibility. Those views appealed to libertarians, conservatives, and many others. It was quite successful politically and threw a monkey wrench into the political arrangements of both parties, which is why Democrats demonized and stigmatized it and Republicans didn't do much to defend it.
If you think that libertarians are "reactionary", you really have no idea what the word means. And you should figure out whether you really want to associate yourself with the terminology used by communist and socialist revolutionaries to characterize Western democracies during the cold war.
We disagree on pretty much every point you have made. And if you don't want to piss off people, you shouldn't start off by insulting them.
The one standard deviation in IQ between different "races" is no more mysterious than the one standard deviation in IQ between Anglicans and Pentecostals, or Jews and Baptists. There is no more an "inherent ability of the races" as there is an "inherent ability of religious groups". If you think such a thing exists, you are a racist.
Not significantly according to any data I have seen (c.f. for example JBHE).
Yes, and differences between groups actually are that big, as you can tell from different passing rates in various tests (see e.g., here). All people are trying to do with these adjustments is to make up for those observed big differences. One can argue about whether that is the right policy, but your arguments about "statistical significance" and "tails" miss the point.
Why would you want to do that? You either forward state between two separate apps, or you run the app somewhere and just connect to it from different places (cf OnLive, Google Docs). Works like a charm, and people don't think twice about it.
Forwarding sessions or apps from the phone to a desktop is something people do in a pinch for old, outdated software; it's not something anybody will do regularly in the future, and it's not needed for what's shown in that video.
The Tea Party articulated its positions in the Contract from America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_from_America
The Libertarian Party has specific, clearly articulated positions in its party platform on http://www.lp.org/
Compare those with the democratic party platform, which is quite a bit more vague: http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform
You keep playing word games, sometimes talking about the "libertarian movement" (whatever that may be), then whether the "Libertarian party" wins elections.
Most people with libertarian views don't identify as "libertarians" or vote libertarian, just like most "atheists" don't identify as such or go to atheist meetings and most homosexuals also didn't use to identify as "homosexuals" and didn't use to go to gay hangouts. People stigmatize the names of their political opponents and eventually people react by changing names.
Many people who hold libertarian beliefs vote Republican, represented by "the Enterprisers". For better or worse, they tend to be well-informed, well-educated rich white males, with a strong interest in macroeconomics. There's a smaller group of libertarian-leaning voters voting Democrat, mostly because they dislike social conservatism even more than progressive economics.
And these voters have an impact. They prevent social conservatives and progressives from succeeding as presidential candidates in both parties. And they have successfully pushed issues such as drug legalization, gay marriage, economic liberalization and free trade, etc. And as libertarian ideas succeed, they just get co-opted by the two major parties who pretend they really always stood for these ideas in the first place, leaving libertarian groups with the next batch of controversial ideas to push.
Sorry, but your analysis of libertarianism and its demographics are just out of touch with reality. The "Libertarian party" is inconsequential, but libertarian-leaning voters are a major political force in the US today.
Your math is wrong. A difference of one sigma between two groups means that the chances that a random person from one group outperforms a random person from the other group go from 50% to about 75%. That's a big difference and doesn't just affect the tails.
Android integrates them into a complete solution: any app can share anything it likes via whatever your hardware supports. It's an integrated, general-purpose solution. It would even work for screen sharing. But, get real. These days, people give presentations in the browser, and moving the session is as simple as sharing a URL, which is the default action when you tap two Android NFC devices together.
(2) is people who don't give a f*ck about climate change. We don't give a f*ck about climate change because, while it exists, it hasn't been shown to be an actual threat and because it's going to take care of itself. The real threat is a new dark ages because Luddites take over society again.
So, the Microsoft video doesn't show something that is "better than what we have today", it just shows something that is better than what Microsoft ships today. That makes Microsoft the opposite of an innovator and leader, namely an out of touch company that is reduced to catching up.
Climate change is real: CO2 emissions cause warming. That's not the question anymore. The question now is whether it is harmful, whether it can be prevented, and whether the costs of preventing it are lower than the benefits. Nobody agrees on those questions.
And I am getting sick and tired of people who gladly and blindly risk the well being and lives of millions of people because of a pet peeve, and that is what people like you are advocating.
Congress has compromised plenty with Obama, and he has been a hugely active president:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/obamas_top_50_accomplishments035755.php
You brought up Hitler, not me. Obama is, of course, no Hitler; Obama is a well-meaning progressive president who overpromises and overspends too much. But your comparison is food for thought, because Hitler, too, asked for powers to fix the economy, help the jobless, and improve security, and parliament granted them to him "for the good of the country".
Not only does the technology exist, it's been standardized: NFC, QR, and WiDi (among others).
It's a long ways from that observation to saying that we can or should adopt the kinds of proposals made by global warming activists.
Helen Clark (your link) is a political scientist and left-wing politician. She is not qualified.
Almost anything humans do claims lives: driving cars, building roads, building dams, creating new medicines, etc. Life is about making the right tradeoffs.
Don't need that: that category is the same as category (3), global warming activists.
Yeah, the multi-million dollar homes and expensive interior design are definitely better than what most people can afford.
In terms of technology, that video is showing little that's new, and nothing that was invented by Microsoft.
To break this down for you, there are three categories of people: (1) people who deny global warming, (2) people who don't give a f*ck, and (3) people who want to do something about it. If you look at it, you'll find that most people who oppose (3) are in category (2) not category (1).
Look at this paper:
http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/oilshale-assessment-2010-for-water.pdf
You can calculate EROI for two reason: one is cost, the other is greenhouse gas emissions.
For the first, that's a calculation energy companies do in order to see whether it is profitable and competitive, and you can bet that it is. That means the EROI on shale oil can't be too far from the EROI on regular oil because otherwise it wouldn't be profitable to extract it..
To calculate greenhouse gas emissions, you need to include "self energy" as a cost. But EROI-with-self-energy is a poor measure there because big differences in EROI translate into only small differences in carbon emissions. An EROI of 1:1 emits less than twice as much carbon as an EROI of 40:1. A better measure is carbon emitted per unit energy.
JVM and CLR are not competing standards, they are failed standards.
JavaScript is a standard scripting language, but not a VM.
Right now, the number of competing standards for embedded virtual machine for compiled languages is zero.
As opposed to the Democratic and Republican parties, who are run by saints and scholars, and whose members all have IQs upwards of a hot day in Death Valley?
I'm sorry that your political understanding is so limited that you can only think in Democratic and Republican categories, and don't understand how movements and political ideas (progressivism, Christian conservatism, libertarianism, Tea Party, etc.) function within US politics. But your ignorance doesn't make make those movements irrelevant. Modern US libertarianism represents a combination of fiscal conservatism and social liberalism that represents the preferences of many voters, and it is having an impact.
That's a shame.
is because a bunch of squabbling companies can't agree what kind of runtime to put in the browser. So, we're stuck with JavaScript, .NET, and the JVM. How hard can it be to turn the llvm into a plugin?
For Congress to stop a US president from doing something has a very high cost, by design. That's why it happens rarely and why most US presidents get away with a lot, even though people compile long lists of their legal and constitutional violations.
My point is this: a lot of people have no problem if nothing moves in Congress for the next four years and if Obama doesn't get any legislation passed. We don't care whether the tax cuts expire, it's not about the level of taxation. It's that passing new laws will inevitably be an opportunity for more rent seeking by special interests, hidden in laws that are thousands of pages long, and create big legal uncertainty for both individuals and businesses.
Far from "letting the country burn", stopping the president (any president) from passing new legislation for a few years is a breather the country needs, in particular after all the crap both Bush and Obama pushed through over the last decade.
We've been in the midst of an industrial revolution for a century, with constant everyday change. People today work as network engineers, software architects, GUI designers, game voice over actors, 3D designers, and in many other jobs that effectively didn't exist a few decades ago. And many of these jobs and businesses get created out of necessity by people who lose their old jobs and need to figure out new ways of making money. If a nation tries to protect its workers from this, it will fall behind as other nations take the new opportunities, create the new jobs, and out-compete it.