In my company, one of our products comes with a useful database. The license clearly stipulates that the database and its updates are only allowed to be used with the product. It is a kind of courtesy to make that product more user friendly. For integration into big central systems the database is available separately with different licensing schemes.
Predictably, in the end we had to encrypt the database to enforce compliance, as too many customers (it must be said: less so in western countries) would not care to follow the license. Just because you technically can do something, doesn't make it right, esp. if it is not allowed according to the license.
If reports of Apple's upcoming smartwatch are true: a device crammed with non invasive health related sensors, (with more sensors being added to later models), then I could see it succeeding at creating a new market. If it is not clunky. I can see this approach as a gamechanger.
I also wouldn't be surprised if it could be used to control home automation via their homekit api. While you are sitting in the sofa, a quick swipe to adjust the light.
Finally i can see it exchanging maps information with an iphone which is in your pocket. A quick glance for directions as tou walk.
Curious what the real featureset will be. We live in interesting times.
In principle, I can imagine that wilfully wrong wikipedia information can ruin someone's business and career opportunities, and in that case a defamation suit seems appropriate, very similar to spreading defamation through other publication channels. Wikipedia, as much as I love it, should not be above the standards by which books or magazines are judged.
However, in this case, if the negative information checks out true (and there are plenty of references), such as the convictions he received, then there is no good reason for him to sue. If he weren't convicted, it would not be in the article. As others have mentioned he should rather look up "Streisand Effect" before sueing.
Not everyone is crazy like that. Many want simply to get a realistic sound reproduction, something you can quite plainly not get from all the little plastic multimedia boxes or bose all in one system.
It must be said that a good quality vinyl record played on good equipment can sound nicely musical. Sometimes better than the cd, but this is often because there is usually less "loudness war" (overcompression) on vinyl compared to many popular music cd masterings.
This was the case with one of the last 5 Bob Dylan albums (I can't remember which one), everyone could hear on the same system that the rare vinyl edition did sound noticeably more musical, and the fault was purely in the compression used in the CD mastering process.
What can be seen as a weak point can be one of the biggest advantages of analog photography with basic manual exposure cameras: it costs money and it takes time. Meaning, you learn to think more about the shot before taking it.
I noticed this in my own photography:
- I often photographed with a Rolleiflex up to the year 2000 or so; I had approx 3 pictures on a roll of 12 that I found really worth enlarging .
- With an AF 35mm SLR back then I made 3 really good pictures on a roll of 36.
- In digital I have 3 really good pictures on 300 or so.
Currently I am using film again next to digital. The Horizon 202 panoramic camera is a superb tool for fascinating pictures, I bring it on every holiday. I also found a very cheap good condition Nikon F3, which was one of the very best manual focus SLRs ever made. It is a joy to put simply a fixed 35mm lens on it, load a black and white film and walk around.
bR
Regarding printing, it is lovely to see the image appear in a tray but largely I replaced that with scanning and Photoshop. However, it is truly fascinating and worthwhile to learn ancient print techniques such as gum bichromate. Once mastered the results can be incredible, much more poetic than any Photoshop filter you throw at a picture. Unfortunately I don't get around doing that kind of art form these days, it is a slow process, I simply don't have enough personal hobby time anymore. But for those that can spare the time it is a fantastic investment of effort.
>Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
I thought that he came up himself with the idea of the nifty magnetic power cable connector. A very good innovation that must have saved many a Mac laptop when users would step on the cable.
In any case he could see potential and kept on pushing his people further and further until he would say himself "ok, now we have something really cool.". It is that attitude that caused Apple to come with great products. Regarding Cook, he seems a perfectionist as well in a different way. Let's see what they will come up with their watch product before we really judge him. Apple was rarrely about being first to market for example with smartphones or music players, but they tend to do things truly well. Currently there is no smartwatch I would bother wearing. Considering Apple's history, there is a good chance that their approach will be a lot more attractive.
>>What's the point in running a brand new OS on it? Is HP-UX not good enough? Or the many other *NIX's? I'll put money on Linux being ported to it before it even ships to Joe Public
Much as I like unixes (way back using early slackware distributions, now since 10 years on OSX), I do think that it is time for some real innovation. Unix dates from, what, 1970 or so. More than 40 years ago. We were all playing vinyl records for music back then. I think it would be good if a mainstream company (outside pure academia) would build from the ground up something usable yet radically fresh and truly future oriented. I remember that some 15 years ago Apple and IBM worked together on a radical object-oriented OS, but nothing came from it.
From the summary this seems like most OSX software: simply an icon with everything inside that you only need to drag to your Applications folder (or in the case of the OSX app store, the iconthat is downloaded). I've always liked this ultra-intuitive installation process.
There was a good article in The New Yorker a few months ago about the Amazon business practices.
Their very tough negotiation position typically forces the publisher to give big discounts, and even extra money to be listed high enough in the sales results.
Amazon books are usually cheaper than in many other stores so from a consumer level, this seems like a win for the capitalist philosophy.
However, it turns out that these huge discounts have a snowball effect towards the authors: they now typically get lower royalties per book, sometimes much lower. I had this confirmed by a few authors I know. The danger for the general culture is that authors would write far less as they (except the most popular ones) will have to do more other work to have a normal standard of living. Most of the midlist authors, and those are in my opinion often the most interesting ones, already had to combine writing with other professional activities. In essence there is nothing wrong with that, but when at one point they have little time left to write, books will come much slower.
In some European countries there are fixed price laws regarding books, these are exactly there to ensure that writers can focus enough on their craft, it is seen as a matter of national culture that should be stimulated, not necessarily mercantilised.
I do agree that a purely capitalist attitude in this matter can be detrimental to culture over the longer term.
Discuss.
You could turn it around and say: "If the material is illegal, then why would you want to access it? Law-abiding citizens wouldn't. For law-abiding citizens the site does not need to exist."
Well, you could be right. I am not an American. But I thought that let us say the artform was illegal in some American states. I read an article a few years ago about a particularly nasty actor/director in the genre (sorry, I forgot the name, others may chime in) who was jailed because of his extreme videos, while it was all consensual adults. If it were legal in that state, then why was he locked up? Again, I am not American but because of this my perception is that it is not everywhere legal in the USA.
If it would happen, then the stars would need to find another job. I have no strong views pro or con myself, except perhaps that there is already enough of it to satisfy multiple lifetimes of self pleasure.
In general governments and "well-thinking" pressure groups don't like porn. It seems to me that a perfect and easy way to give that industry a heavy blow is to rule that porn cannot be copyrighted. So why is this not done?
I can see it becoming successful, like Airplay which is adopted widely, and Carplay also gets lots of interest.
For me, I am imagine that i wear the iwatch while sitting in the sofa and with a touch on its display I can quickly dim the lights.
Or, when I am about to drive home in wintertime I use an iphone app to start heating the house.
Yes, other systems exist but I like the convergence. Despite all the hate here, what Apple usually does very well is make technology accessible and userfriendly.
Every 4 to 5 years would be good for servicing a mechanical watch, in your case with the extra mention of regulation.
A mechanical chrono is a terrifyingly complex device that needs pampering.to keep it at the top performance.
This service might be expensive, but still I would only order it from an authorised dealer.
Anyway, as I wrote elsewhere, 1 minute per month is an error of 1/(60*24*30) or only 0.02% (!!!), which in my opinion is very acceptable for a mechanical device.
Hence, I expect that it is within spec.You cannot expect the same accuracy as with a quartz watch.
People like thos "crappy" mechanical watches for far different reasons. For me it is not an "A or B" question, I can see myself alternatively wearing a mechanical wathc or an iwatch, depending on the occasion.
Fair enough, you are not in the market for a mechanical watch. If you'd buy a mechanical Grand Seiko or (usually) Rolex etc, then you could perhaps (!) reduce this to 20-30 seconds per month. Considering that this is all traditional mechanics, that would be as flawless and high a standard as you can get. Even 1 minute is an error of 1/(60*24*30), in my opinion a good result.
If you can't live with that, then quartz or atomic is the way to go. Nothing wrong with quartz, and in my opinion there is also nothing wrong with loving the intricate mechanics of traditional watchmaking, at the price of applying small adjustments from time to time.
For precision, buy any $20 quartz watch. A mechanical watch is for those who love the beauty of the pure mechanical engineering. Some watch aficionados are snobs, some are not. I have as mall collection of watches, none really expensive, half quartz, half mechanical. I like m mechanical as much as I like my quartz in different ways. 1 minute per month is a few seconds per day, something I can easily live with and fascinating from an engineering point of view.
Come on. It is still good, and falls within the COSC guidelines of something like +-4 seconds per day (sorry I forgot the exact deviation).
For a mechanical construct, this is still well done.
And what is wrong with liking the beauty of mechanics? For precision any $20 digital watch will beat all mechanical watches.
This Tag Heuer of the parent is an automatic, mechanical watch. Think about it, one minute accuracy over a month realised with only vibrating springs etc. That is technically impressive. FYI many quarts watches are rated +- 15 seconds per month, only 4 times better!
Nothing wrong with enjoying a mechanical watch for the joy of the fine engineering, and the pleasure of the nearly smooth second hand.
Interestingly, the mechanism of the modern Tag chronograpths is a close brother of a certain Seiko movement, something that the Swiis company prefers not to mention.
In fact the inflation of Rolex in recent years is such that you may well be able to sell a Rolex you bought say 5 years ago for the price you then paid for it.
Not sure if these were implied in the original question: Nikon F2, the electronical F3, and any Leica rangefinder camera and the Rolleiflex medium format camera.
They may need a very occasional lubrication but that's it. I hav ebene using a 1950s Rolleiflex very often (though now I mainly shoot digital). It is still capabable of outstanding results.
Also a number of mechanical watches can be enjoyed for decades. Rolex of course. But at the lower end of the price spectrum automatic Seikos will also last a long time, or Omegas from before they were a "serious" brand will also last for decades.
Slashdot Mirror
In my company, one of our products comes with a useful database. The license clearly stipulates that the database and its updates are only allowed to be used with the product. It is a kind of courtesy to make that product more user friendly. For integration into big central systems the database is available separately with different licensing schemes. Predictably, in the end we had to encrypt the database to enforce compliance, as too many customers (it must be said: less so in western countries) would not care to follow the license. Just because you technically can do something, doesn't make it right, esp. if it is not allowed according to the license.
If reports of Apple's upcoming smartwatch are true: a device crammed with non invasive health related sensors, (with more sensors being added to later models), then I could see it succeeding at creating a new market. If it is not clunky. I can see this approach as a gamechanger. I also wouldn't be surprised if it could be used to control home automation via their homekit api. While you are sitting in the sofa, a quick swipe to adjust the light. Finally i can see it exchanging maps information with an iphone which is in your pocket. A quick glance for directions as tou walk. Curious what the real featureset will be. We live in interesting times.
I didn t know. In that case the man has a point sueing.
Never heard about Mr Lee. I am a smelly cheese from Normandy that gained consciousness.
In principle, I can imagine that wilfully wrong wikipedia information can ruin someone's business and career opportunities, and in that case a defamation suit seems appropriate, very similar to spreading defamation through other publication channels. Wikipedia, as much as I love it, should not be above the standards by which books or magazines are judged.
However, in this case, if the negative information checks out true (and there are plenty of references), such as the convictions he received, then there is no good reason for him to sue. If he weren't convicted, it would not be in the article. As others have mentioned he should rather look up "Streisand Effect" before sueing.
Not everyone is crazy like that. Many want simply to get a realistic sound reproduction, something you can quite plainly not get from all the little plastic multimedia boxes or bose all in one system.
It must be said that a good quality vinyl record played on good equipment can sound nicely musical. Sometimes better than the cd, but this is often because there is usually less "loudness war" (overcompression) on vinyl compared to many popular music cd masterings.
This was the case with one of the last 5 Bob Dylan albums (I can't remember which one), everyone could hear on the same system that the rare vinyl edition did sound noticeably more musical, and the fault was purely in the compression used in the CD mastering process.
What can be seen as a weak point can be one of the biggest advantages of analog photography with basic manual exposure cameras: it costs money and it takes time. Meaning, you learn to think more about the shot before taking it.
I noticed this in my own photography:
- I often photographed with a Rolleiflex up to the year 2000 or so; I had approx 3 pictures on a roll of 12 that I found really worth enlarging
. - With an AF 35mm SLR back then I made 3 really good pictures on a roll of 36.
- In digital I have 3 really good pictures on 300 or so.
Currently I am using film again next to digital. The Horizon 202 panoramic camera is a superb tool for fascinating pictures, I bring it on every holiday. I also found a very cheap good condition Nikon F3, which was one of the very best manual focus SLRs ever made. It is a joy to put simply a fixed 35mm lens on it, load a black and white film and walk around.
bR Regarding printing, it is lovely to see the image appear in a tray but largely I replaced that with scanning and Photoshop. However, it is truly fascinating and worthwhile to learn ancient print techniques such as gum bichromate. Once mastered the results can be incredible, much more poetic than any Photoshop filter you throw at a picture. Unfortunately I don't get around doing that kind of art form these days, it is a slow process, I simply don't have enough personal hobby time anymore. But for those that can spare the time it is a fantastic investment of effort.
>Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
I thought that he came up himself with the idea of the nifty magnetic power cable connector. A very good innovation that must have saved many a Mac laptop when users would step on the cable.
In any case he could see potential and kept on pushing his people further and further until he would say himself "ok, now we have something really cool.". It is that attitude that caused Apple to come with great products. Regarding Cook, he seems a perfectionist as well in a different way. Let's see what they will come up with their watch product before we really judge him. Apple was rarrely about being first to market for example with smartphones or music players, but they tend to do things truly well. Currently there is no smartwatch I would bother wearing. Considering Apple's history, there is a good chance that their approach will be a lot more attractive.
>>What's the point in running a brand new OS on it? Is HP-UX not good enough? Or the many other *NIX's? I'll put money on Linux being ported to it before it even ships to Joe Public
Much as I like unixes (way back using early slackware distributions, now since 10 years on OSX), I do think that it is time for some real innovation. Unix dates from, what, 1970 or so. More than 40 years ago. We were all playing vinyl records for music back then. I think it would be good if a mainstream company (outside pure academia) would build from the ground up something usable yet radically fresh and truly future oriented. I remember that some 15 years ago Apple and IBM worked together on a radical object-oriented OS, but nothing came from it.
From the summary this seems like most OSX software: simply an icon with everything inside that you only need to drag to your Applications folder (or in the case of the OSX app store, the iconthat is downloaded). I've always liked this ultra-intuitive installation process.
There was a good article in The New Yorker a few months ago about the Amazon business practices.
Their very tough negotiation position typically forces the publisher to give big discounts, and even extra money to be listed high enough in the sales results.
Amazon books are usually cheaper than in many other stores so from a consumer level, this seems like a win for the capitalist philosophy.
However, it turns out that these huge discounts have a snowball effect towards the authors: they now typically get lower royalties per book, sometimes much lower. I had this confirmed by a few authors I know.
The danger for the general culture is that authors would write far less as they (except the most popular ones) will have to do more other work to have a normal standard of living. Most of the midlist authors, and those are in my opinion often the most interesting ones, already had to combine writing with other professional activities. In essence there is nothing wrong with that, but when at one point they have little time left to write, books will come much slower.
In some European countries there are fixed price laws regarding books, these are exactly there to ensure that writers can focus enough on their craft, it is seen as a matter of national culture that should be stimulated, not necessarily mercantilised.
I do agree that a purely capitalist attitude in this matter can be detrimental to culture over the longer term.
Discuss.
You could turn it around and say: "If the material is illegal, then why would you want to access it? Law-abiding citizens wouldn't. For law-abiding citizens the site does not need to exist."
Well, you could be right. I am not an American. But I thought that let us say the artform was illegal in some American states. I read an article a few years ago about a particularly nasty actor/director in the genre (sorry, I forgot the name, others may chime in) who was jailed because of his extreme videos, while it was all consensual adults. If it were legal in that state, then why was he locked up?
Again, I am not American but because of this my perception is that it is not everywhere legal in the USA.
If it would happen, then the stars would need to find another job. I have no strong views pro or con myself, except perhaps that there is already enough of it to satisfy multiple lifetimes of self pleasure.
In general governments and "well-thinking" pressure groups don't like porn. It seems to me that a perfect and easy way to give that industry a heavy blow is to rule that porn cannot be copyrighted. So why is this not done?
>> The City of London Police are abusing their power to enforce civil matters and shut down legitimate search engines.
Yes, if you search long and hard enough you might even find some legitimately freely distributable content.
I can see it becoming successful, like Airplay which is adopted widely, and Carplay also gets lots of interest.
For me, I am imagine that i wear the iwatch while sitting in the sofa and with a touch on its display I can quickly dim the lights. Or, when I am about to drive home in wintertime I use an iphone app to start heating the house.
Yes, other systems exist but I like the convergence.
Despite all the hate here, what Apple usually does very well is make technology accessible and userfriendly.
Every 4 to 5 years would be good for servicing a mechanical watch, in your case with the extra mention of regulation.
A mechanical chrono is a terrifyingly complex device that needs pampering.to keep it at the top performance.
This service might be expensive, but still I would only order it from an authorised dealer.
Anyway, as I wrote elsewhere, 1 minute per month is an error of 1/(60*24*30) or only 0.02% (!!!), which in my opinion is very acceptable for a mechanical device.
Hence, I expect that it is within spec.You cannot expect the same accuracy as with a quartz watch.
People like thos "crappy" mechanical watches for far different reasons. For me it is not an "A or B" question, I can see myself alternatively wearing a mechanical wathc or an iwatch, depending on the occasion.
Fair enough, you are not in the market for a mechanical watch. If you'd buy a mechanical Grand Seiko or (usually) Rolex etc, then you could perhaps (!) reduce this to 20-30 seconds per month. Considering that this is all traditional mechanics, that would be as flawless and high a standard as you can get. Even 1 minute is an error of 1/(60*24*30), in my opinion a good result.
If you can't live with that, then quartz or atomic is the way to go. Nothing wrong with quartz, and in my opinion there is also nothing wrong with loving the intricate mechanics of traditional watchmaking, at the price of applying small adjustments from time to time.
For precision, buy any $20 quartz watch. A mechanical watch is for those who love the beauty of the pure mechanical engineering. Some watch aficionados are snobs, some are not. I have as mall collection of watches, none really expensive, half quartz, half mechanical. I like m mechanical as much as I like my quartz in different ways. 1 minute per month is a few seconds per day, something I can easily live with and fascinating from an engineering point of view.
Come on. It is still good, and falls within the COSC guidelines of something like +-4 seconds per day (sorry I forgot the exact deviation). For a mechanical construct, this is still well done. And what is wrong with liking the beauty of mechanics? For precision any $20 digital watch will beat all mechanical watches.
This Tag Heuer of the parent is an automatic, mechanical watch. Think about it, one minute accuracy over a month realised with only vibrating springs etc. That is technically impressive. FYI many quarts watches are rated +- 15 seconds per month, only 4 times better!
Nothing wrong with enjoying a mechanical watch for the joy of the fine engineering, and the pleasure of the nearly smooth second hand.
Interestingly, the mechanism of the modern Tag chronograpths is a close brother of a certain Seiko movement, something that the Swiis company prefers not to mention.
In fact the inflation of Rolex in recent years is such that you may well be able to sell a Rolex you bought say 5 years ago for the price you then paid for it.
Not sure if these were implied in the original question: Nikon F2, the electronical F3, and any Leica rangefinder camera and the Rolleiflex medium format camera.
They may need a very occasional lubrication but that's it. I hav ebene using a 1950s Rolleiflex very often (though now I mainly shoot digital). It is still capabable of outstanding results.
Also a number of mechanical watches can be enjoyed for decades. Rolex of course. But at the lower end of the price spectrum automatic Seikos will also last a long time, or Omegas from before they were a "serious" brand will also last for decades.
The Amish would survive rather well, I expect. Add a few young surgeons and you're set up for survival.