Your data is a form of payment and you submit to authorizing facebook to use it when you sign up. Why shouldn't Europeans abide by the contract they willfully sign? Facebook is not a public utility, you are not forced to consume it.
But it wasn't the shape of a smartphone when Apple came out with the iPhone. Smartphones had QWERTY keyboards on the bottom half, slide-out keyboards on the rest of them, or some form of advanced 10-key system for textual input. NO ONE had a "full screen, nothing but" phone with the shape the iPhone had, no one.
There will undoubtably be slash dotters feeling superior screaming "Rounded corners?! Bah!" , since no one actually reads TFA or the relevant material. The Patent covers things like relative dimensions (think one by four by nine for the monolith), lack of physical buttons, etc, etc... as well as the degree and parameters to which the corners were rounded. When Samsung's own lawyers were shown an iPhone and a Galaxy side-by-side, he could not tell them apart at a distance of 16 ft. thats pretty bad, don't you think? They used the same outer diameter on the rounded corners, the same dimensions, the same "form factor". Not that they shouldn't have, its a GREAT form factor. But they should need to differentiate their product sufficiently since its a competing product in the same industry, or compensate with a license to use that trade dress. That's known as a "trade dress", and economic minds know that to stimulate innovation in these area's you need to protect the inventors in this space, which, I'm sorry to say, was Apple this time.
A.I. Is like the uncanny valley in design and facial recognition, applied to decision and understanding. I feel bad for researchers who work in the field and suggest they rename it to something else. People will seemingly forever move the goal posts on intelligence forever. Chess-playing computers, computers that can have a conversation, play jeopardy or answer questions like google search or wolfram alpha, analyze videos like the predator system, recognize songs like shazam, spell check better than most, and soon, drive us around are all intelligent. But we hate to believe that machines are as or more intelligent than we are, so we move the goal posts. The reason is... Intelligence is like magic. Once it's understood, it's no longer special, or magical, the concepts become easy, well understood, and the method puts the skill in "well that's obvious and isn't AI". Take whatever you want to call AI functionality, wait a decade and read it back to yourself in 10 years. We will have passed it, but the definition you will use then will change.
To answer the poster's question... Satellites in high stable orbits come to mind, the rover opportunity, maybe some soon-to-be drone like the one flying in interstellar? For certain anything solar powered has a good chance, especially if it's in infra-stellar space. I bet the moon-buggy still works. I think they recently sold the rights to it. It's not turned on, but it doesn't have to be to be called "working", if your definition is "in a functional state".
Nay, as computers get better, faster and more feature-full; so to will web technologies that can leverage them. In fact lately it seems the advancements in computers seem to be the ability to display output (retina screens,etc...). As for actual functionality, browsers growing capable of capturing that (think location data from the GPS device, or images from the camera). In days of old, you needed special plugins and extensions to do such wizardry, but not anymore.
Add to all that, the powerful language JavaScript is becoming, with HTML5, and CSS3, and it's easy to see how the web browser is becoming just another programming language/runtime environment for which you can execute code. The only need for fat applications these days comes in when the control requirements are really really specific (think blockbuster games), or the medium access is paramount (like in video editing). For most use cases, the ability to update and enhance the app on the server and have all users automatically sync with the latest code, and leveraging multiple platforms at once with one code-base by using browsers is much more powerful a paradigm than compiled desktop apps. I suspect in future most development will be web based, server side code, or OS/browser work.
Hence the quote in TFS: Future space expeditions will resemble sea voyages much more than test flights.
I think the issue not as big a problem as the article suggests. The sort of people who will be on the first journeys to other worlds will like have to fight hard to be accepted to go, and endure a hell of a lot of training. Psychological testing and training will no doubt be included along with other preparations for such a mission. That doesn't factor in such as-of-yet-undeveloped advancements like prolonged sleep (hibernation, near-constant earth communication, etc..). Plus, think of how we are communicating in modern times, we text and chat more than face to face communication, and certainly those forms could be accommodated during the voyage, more so than sailors did back in the day.
Mail can be set to disable remote images, but Spotlight should follow the mail settings. The real issue I think, is that Spotlight results also include email from junk mail folders, which is mostly useless (unless searching for email incorrectly tagged as SPAM). This should be disabled, and a user should have to knowingly venture into their SPAM folder to find such messages. Loading remote images from the junk folder is just crazy, beyond even the stupidity of indexing and searching in junk folders. Apple is falling further and further away from Sir Issac's tree it seems.
Is this the post-Jobs era of Apple we should come to expect? I have been using Macs and iPhones since around 2001, and they have been relatively stable, fast, and seemingly more secure than Windows. But lately, it seems they are just riddled with annoyances and bugs I fear will worsen as time goes by.
Note to Tim: Don't accept mediocre standards, or you will loose what has made you great. Put the features on hold! Fix Fix FIX.... Your users will be happier, and thank you.
But that doesn't mean that the government should be paying for it, because not all of us agree we should be paying for it. Using Tax to pay for something should only happen for things we can only collectively purchase, like National Defense. We should be able to pay for it ourselves, and reap the rewards individually
Somebody please provide ONE case of a merger making a bad company better.
Apple bought Next. The next decade and a half was pretty awesome for the computer industry, and no one can deny Apple's (Next's) role in that.
And in general, these mergers should be allowed. I also think Comcast / TWC should not have to release any territory as a stipulation for approval.
What should be stipulated is the removal of any "anti-competitive" agreements these companies have with various municipalities restricting competition in the local broadband market. If you want great service, make the providers compete for your business, and empower consumers with choice!
No it doesn't. The freeway and the side-streets are public spaces, and no one living on a public street has a right to demand that anyone else not use it as they like, so long as they follow the laws of the road. If you want a private street with no traffic, live in a private neighborhood (gated community), where the builders do spread the community cost among the homeowners. The roads were paid for by taxes collected from everyone. Your taxes don't pay for the roads directly in front of your house, and therefore you have (and rightly so) no right to dictates who can use it. Most of the road-work money comes from gasoline taxes, so its fair game.
Consumers are pretty good at protecting themselves. When bad things happen because of a service, public perception, courts, and consumer propensity to spend on the best value proposition will protect the consumer. There is no free market failure here, why do we need government to come in and regulate this? If party A and party B agree to a service, government only need to step in when a third party not subject to the transaction is harmed by the transaction. A lack of business due to competition is not a harm, it's the consumer exercising their liberty. Government sanctioned taxi services has lead to the artificially high prices for taxis, and kept demand low. There's a government failure here, let the free market fix it. Adam Mith's invisible hand works wonders, it will fix this too.
As soon as you get off the internet, turn off your air conditioner, hang up your telephone, and adjust your diet to compensate for the lack of food on your table, all provided by the ingenuity of America, you ungrateful POS. Wherever you are from, it doesn't matter, it hasn't been as productive, efficient, or as innovative as here in America
Wrong. Apple are outdone on that front by Samsung, MS... You really should check your facts before showing the rest of/. how wrong you are. Some of us actually RTFA, read relevant info, and post knowingly. Hater.
...certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...
End of story. There can be no action taken by a government on behalf of its people argued to be for its people, yet conceal that action from its people in the name of its people. It's oxymoronic.
need to keep some things secret
Need to keep things secret? Who decides what is needed to be kept secret? Patriots? Those who stand with liberty and freedom certainly don't.
I know, the stingray is essentially a hacking tool. That makes you think though, why on earth is there a large wireless network carrying sensitive data without TLS (transport layer security), or encryption between the modem on the phone, and the carrier? Either the contents are not sensitive, or the carriers / cell phone manufactures are complicit or worse.. incompetent.
If the police do not have a warrant, then you can refuse to give the police information. Like an individual can plead the 5th, and remain silent, short of a court order, so can a corporation. Verizon / AT&T do not have to hand over anything without a warrant or law saying they have to. But the question is, how much money do they get for cooperating? How much does the government spend on telecom services, and how much grant money is spent on the telecom industry? They are incentivized to cooperate.
You can not consent to what you do not know. A free society mandates that the governing be done in open view of the public. Otherwise, how can we consent to what we are unaware of. As Lincoln said: "... of the people, by the people, for the people..."
The word of God makes no mention of nuclear fission either, yet I bet you have used the resulting energy either directly or indirectly. Go read an accurate science book when debating matters of science, or stay away from our progress.
CaptainDork isn't implying anything. S/he says it's okay to attack the character of an individual who is skeptical of the facts, not beliefs.
Right but his sentence could be read another way (or so it did when I first read it).
Can he do that by practicing illegal discrimination? If you bothered to read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork, you'd see that Ken Ham is engaging in just that.
It is illegal, so he can't. But then, I wasn't commenting on how he builds his park, or who he hires to build it. Only whatever he wants. (so long as it passes building codes, but then again, I was really stating my principles not what is legally possible.
That's the point. Again, read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork. And if you're too lazy to do that, then here you go:
Thanks for that. But no, I did read the article. I just don't agree with Ken Ham spending public funds to build something based on his beliefs, and not our collective scientific knowledge. I don't think the government has any place paying for the support of ANYONE's beliefs, including Ken Hams. I know the article was stating that Kentucky did so, and I'm glad I am not from Kentucky. Again, I was really stating what I think is right:
I just don't want him influencing public policy or spending public funds on projects that are not based on science.
So what are the odds that a white woman of earharts build, along with western womans shoe, and a sextent would be found on an island a few hundred miles from where earhart went missing and a piece of aluminum that would fit the window of her plane?
Pretty high if you sight the same group as the source but you left out some crucial details:
"We know that in 1940 British Colonial Service officer Gerald Gallagher recovered a partial skeleton of a castaway on Nikumaroro. Unfortunately, those bones have now been lost," Gillespie said.
So how are you so sure that it was her body? There is no positive ID. Don't feed me the old "well who else could it have been?" line. There is no positive ID. If you had the bones and could do DNA testing with someone who is a relative, that would be a verifiable positive ID.
In both your sources (this article's source and the Discovery News articles you mention, the same group has made both claims. Its not like they are financially invested in finding her or anything.
For years, Richard Gillespie, TIGHAR's executive director and author of the book "Finding Amelia," and his crew have been searching the Nikumaroro island for evidence of Earhart... According to Gillespie, who is set to embark on a new $500,000 Nikumaroro expedition next summer, the two became castaways and eventually died there.
Right? Because, its not like headlines matter anyway. Why should they be well thought out? only thing that needs to be accurate is TFA anyway..../sarcasm
Just because something is licensed for a "0" cost, doesn't mean its necessarily free of restrictions. Pandora has free radio, and I assure you, you can not (legally) rip the songs off of it and redistribute them on a website, for example. Free != open source GPLed. It just means no money need change hands for the license.
The link from your article to the photograph hosted on the Miami Herald website is 404 Not Found. Surprising. What "Imaging Specialists" are they using? How can a 1937 photograph ID a particular piece of metal that is deformed and found at sea? The shape is... well... deformed! Surely its discolored.
What are you implying? That it's OK to attack Ken Ham, or that its OK for Ken Ham to attack people who don't believe as he does?
Ken Ham can build whatever he wants on his own dime, in his own land. I just don't want him influencing public policy or spending public funds on projects that are not based on science.
Slashdot Mirror
Your data is a form of payment and you submit to authorizing facebook to use it when you sign up. Why shouldn't Europeans abide by the contract they willfully sign? Facebook is not a public utility, you are not forced to consume it.
But it wasn't the shape of a smartphone when Apple came out with the iPhone. Smartphones had QWERTY keyboards on the bottom half, slide-out keyboards on the rest of them, or some form of advanced 10-key system for textual input. NO ONE had a "full screen, nothing but" phone with the shape the iPhone had, no one.
There will undoubtably be slash dotters feeling superior screaming "Rounded corners?! Bah!" , since no one actually reads TFA or the relevant material. The Patent covers things like relative dimensions (think one by four by nine for the monolith), lack of physical buttons, etc, etc... as well as the degree and parameters to which the corners were rounded. When Samsung's own lawyers were shown an iPhone and a Galaxy side-by-side, he could not tell them apart at a distance of 16 ft. thats pretty bad, don't you think? They used the same outer diameter on the rounded corners, the same dimensions, the same "form factor". Not that they shouldn't have, its a GREAT form factor. But they should need to differentiate their product sufficiently since its a competing product in the same industry, or compensate with a license to use that trade dress. That's known as a "trade dress", and economic minds know that to stimulate innovation in these area's you need to protect the inventors in this space, which, I'm sorry to say, was Apple this time.
A.I. Is like the uncanny valley in design and facial recognition, applied to decision and understanding. I feel bad for researchers who work in the field and suggest they rename it to something else. People will seemingly forever move the goal posts on intelligence forever. Chess-playing computers, computers that can have a conversation, play jeopardy or answer questions like google search or wolfram alpha, analyze videos like the predator system, recognize songs like shazam, spell check better than most, and soon, drive us around are all intelligent. But we hate to believe that machines are as or more intelligent than we are, so we move the goal posts. The reason is... Intelligence is like magic. Once it's understood, it's no longer special, or magical, the concepts become easy, well understood, and the method puts the skill in "well that's obvious and isn't AI". Take whatever you want to call AI functionality, wait a decade and read it back to yourself in 10 years. We will have passed it, but the definition you will use then will change. To answer the poster's question... Satellites in high stable orbits come to mind, the rover opportunity, maybe some soon-to-be drone like the one flying in interstellar? For certain anything solar powered has a good chance, especially if it's in infra-stellar space. I bet the moon-buggy still works. I think they recently sold the rights to it. It's not turned on, but it doesn't have to be to be called "working", if your definition is "in a functional state".
Nay, as computers get better, faster and more feature-full; so to will web technologies that can leverage them. In fact lately it seems the advancements in computers seem to be the ability to display output (retina screens,etc...). As for actual functionality, browsers growing capable of capturing that (think location data from the GPS device, or images from the camera). In days of old, you needed special plugins and extensions to do such wizardry, but not anymore.
Add to all that, the powerful language JavaScript is becoming, with HTML5, and CSS3, and it's easy to see how the web browser is becoming just another programming language/runtime environment for which you can execute code. The only need for fat applications these days comes in when the control requirements are really really specific (think blockbuster games), or the medium access is paramount (like in video editing).
For most use cases, the ability to update and enhance the app on the server and have all users automatically sync with the latest code, and leveraging multiple platforms at once with one code-base by using browsers is much more powerful a paradigm than compiled desktop apps. I suspect in future most development will be web based, server side code, or OS/browser work.
Seems that there are a more ubiquitous items we could designate? Why a form of pollution?
Hence the quote in TFS: Future space expeditions will resemble sea voyages much more than test flights.
I think the issue not as big a problem as the article suggests. The sort of people who will be on the first journeys to other worlds will like have to fight hard to be accepted to go, and endure a hell of a lot of training. Psychological testing and training will no doubt be included along with other preparations for such a mission. That doesn't factor in such as-of-yet-undeveloped advancements like prolonged sleep (hibernation, near-constant earth communication, etc..). Plus, think of how we are communicating in modern times, we text and chat more than face to face communication, and certainly those forms could be accommodated during the voyage, more so than sailors did back in the day.
Mail can be set to disable remote images, but Spotlight should follow the mail settings. The real issue I think, is that Spotlight results also include email from junk mail folders, which is mostly useless (unless searching for email incorrectly tagged as SPAM). This should be disabled, and a user should have to knowingly venture into their SPAM folder to find such messages. Loading remote images from the junk folder is just crazy, beyond even the stupidity of indexing and searching in junk folders. Apple is falling further and further away from Sir Issac's tree it seems.
Is this the post-Jobs era of Apple we should come to expect? I have been using Macs and iPhones since around 2001, and they have been relatively stable, fast, and seemingly more secure than Windows. But lately, it seems they are just riddled with annoyances and bugs I fear will worsen as time goes by.
Note to Tim: Don't accept mediocre standards, or you will loose what has made you great. Put the features on hold! Fix Fix FIX.... Your users will be happier, and thank you.
But that doesn't mean that the government should be paying for it, because not all of us agree we should be paying for it. Using Tax to pay for something should only happen for things we can only collectively purchase, like National Defense. We should be able to pay for it ourselves, and reap the rewards individually
Somebody please provide ONE case of a merger making a bad company better.
Apple bought Next. The next decade and a half was pretty awesome for the computer industry, and no one can deny Apple's (Next's) role in that.
And in general, these mergers should be allowed. I also think Comcast / TWC should not have to release any territory as a stipulation for approval.
What should be stipulated is the removal of any "anti-competitive" agreements these companies have with various municipalities restricting competition in the local broadband market. If you want great service, make the providers compete for your business, and empower consumers with choice!
Kinda depends on what/who was there first
No it doesn't. The freeway and the side-streets are public spaces, and no one living on a public street has a right to demand that anyone else not use it as they like, so long as they follow the laws of the road. If you want a private street with no traffic, live in a private neighborhood (gated community), where the builders do spread the community cost among the homeowners. The roads were paid for by taxes collected from everyone. Your taxes don't pay for the roads directly in front of your house, and therefore you have (and rightly so) no right to dictates who can use it. Most of the road-work money comes from gasoline taxes, so its fair game.
Consumers are pretty good at protecting themselves. When bad things happen because of a service, public perception, courts, and consumer propensity to spend on the best value proposition will protect the consumer. There is no free market failure here, why do we need government to come in and regulate this? If party A and party B agree to a service, government only need to step in when a third party not subject to the transaction is harmed by the transaction. A lack of business due to competition is not a harm, it's the consumer exercising their liberty. Government sanctioned taxi services has lead to the artificially high prices for taxis, and kept demand low. There's a government failure here, let the free market fix it. Adam Mith's invisible hand works wonders, it will fix this too.
As soon as you get off the internet, turn off your air conditioner, hang up your telephone, and adjust your diet to compensate for the lack of food on your table, all provided by the ingenuity of America, you ungrateful POS. Wherever you are from, it doesn't matter, it hasn't been as productive, efficient, or as innovative as here in America
Wrong. Apple are outdone on that front by Samsung, MS... You really should check your facts before showing the rest of /. how wrong you are. Some of us actually RTFA, read relevant info, and post knowingly. Hater.
need to keep some things secret
Need to keep things secret? Who decides what is needed to be kept secret? Patriots? Those who stand with liberty and freedom certainly don't.
I know, the stingray is essentially a hacking tool. That makes you think though, why on earth is there a large wireless network carrying sensitive data without TLS (transport layer security), or encryption between the modem on the phone, and the carrier? Either the contents are not sensitive, or the carriers / cell phone manufactures are complicit or worse.. incompetent.
If the police do not have a warrant, then you can refuse to give the police information. Like an individual can plead the 5th, and remain silent, short of a court order, so can a corporation. Verizon / AT&T do not have to hand over anything without a warrant or law saying they have to. But the question is, how much money do they get for cooperating? How much does the government spend on telecom services, and how much grant money is spent on the telecom industry? They are incentivized to cooperate.
You can not consent to what you do not know. A free society mandates that the governing be done in open view of the public. Otherwise, how can we consent to what we are unaware of. As Lincoln said: "... of the people, by the people, for the people..."
The word of God makes no mention of nuclear fission either, yet I bet you have used the resulting energy either directly or indirectly. Go read an accurate science book when debating matters of science, or stay away from our progress.
CaptainDork isn't implying anything. S/he says it's okay to attack the character of an individual who is skeptical of the facts, not beliefs.
Right but his sentence could be read another way (or so it did when I first read it).
Can he do that by practicing illegal discrimination? If you bothered to read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork, you'd see that Ken Ham is engaging in just that.
It is illegal, so he can't. But then, I wasn't commenting on how he builds his park, or who he hires to build it. Only whatever he wants. (so long as it passes building codes, but then again, I was really stating my principles not what is legally possible.
That's the point. Again, read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork. And if you're too lazy to do that, then here you go:
Thanks for that. But no, I did read the article. I just don't agree with Ken Ham spending public funds to build something based on his beliefs, and not our collective scientific knowledge. I don't think the government has any place paying for the support of ANYONE's beliefs, including Ken Hams. I know the article was stating that Kentucky did so, and I'm glad I am not from Kentucky. Again, I was really stating what I think is right:
I just don't want him influencing public policy or spending public funds on projects that are not based on science.
So what are the odds that a white woman of earharts build, along with western womans shoe, and a sextent would be found on an island a few hundred miles from where earhart went missing and a piece of aluminum that would fit the window of her plane?
Pretty high if you sight the same group as the source but you left out some crucial details:
... According to Gillespie, who is set to embark on a new $500,000 Nikumaroro expedition next summer, the two became castaways and eventually died there.
"We know that in 1940 British Colonial Service officer Gerald Gallagher recovered a partial skeleton of a castaway on Nikumaroro. Unfortunately, those bones have now been lost," Gillespie said.
So how are you so sure that it was her body? There is no positive ID. Don't feed me the old "well who else could it have been?" line. There is no positive ID. If you had the bones and could do DNA testing with someone who is a relative, that would be a verifiable positive ID.
In both your sources (this article's source and the Discovery News articles you mention, the same group has made both claims. Its not like they are financially invested in finding her or anything.
For years, Richard Gillespie, TIGHAR's executive director and author of the book "Finding Amelia," and his crew have been searching the Nikumaroro island for evidence of Earhart
Woops!
Right? Because, its not like headlines matter anyway. Why should they be well thought out? only thing that needs to be accurate is TFA anyway.... /sarcasm
Just because something is licensed for a "0" cost, doesn't mean its necessarily free of restrictions. Pandora has free radio, and I assure you, you can not (legally) rip the songs off of it and redistribute them on a website, for example. Free != open source GPLed. It just means no money need change hands for the license.
Which is why the imaging analysis needs to be independently verified.
The link from your article to the photograph hosted on the Miami Herald website is 404 Not Found. Surprising. What "Imaging Specialists" are they using? How can a 1937 photograph ID a particular piece of metal that is deformed and found at sea? The shape is... well... deformed! Surely its discolored.
What are you implying? That it's OK to attack Ken Ham, or that its OK for Ken Ham to attack people who don't believe as he does?
Ken Ham can build whatever he wants on his own dime, in his own land. I just don't want him influencing public policy or spending public funds on projects that are not based on science.