apple is out of the hot water: OS X needs all the hardware you can throw at it, and more. 512M of RAM and a GHz G4 (not out yet) and the GeForce 3... and maybe, just maybe, it will be fast.
on the PC-front, i agree. my P2/266 with GeForce card is good enough for everything i need, from Word to IE to Win2k (even!) to Quake 3. only Doom3 will require an upgrade. for which, BTW, i will get a cheapo GHz Athlon for $800.
the point is that Apple, a company that makes money selling Hardware, *could* continue to do so using x86. Apple is not interested in becoming Microsoft - nor would they likely succeed (=> next, BE OS,...).
if, say, motorola continues to suck as it does, and intel/AMD continue to get better all the time, that may just happen.
but back to my argument: if Apple were to switch to x86 _at all_, they would be better off with non-cloneable machines. they probably come up with a better concept than the proprietary ROM, but the point is, it's easily possible to make a proprietary x86 system.
more likely, though, is that apple switches to multiple processors, sort of trying to bridge the MHz gap that way. the MHz gap is hurting apple, and it looks like it will continue to get worse.
let's look at the facts:
- M$ wants to cripple mp3 in favor of its own format
- this format sounds better in 64k than mp3 in 64k. big deal. i only listen to 192k and better music. at this bitrate, WMA is on par or lower quality than mp3 (depending on which review you trust).
- the format is copy protected, so i am in for a hassle whenever i want to make a copy for the car, windows crashes or has bugs, i want to listen to something before i buy...
- it is also owned by microsoft, whereas mp3 is owned by no-one and guaranteed to be there even if microsoft, IBM and Intel all simultaneously die.
- microsoft's sole and single purpose for this new format is to cash in on music purchased over the internet. M$ doesn't deny that, or even attempt to.
considering the history of the company and it's limitless megalomania - they even tried to _own_ the net, remember? - the only possible response is to bash the hell out of them. ignoring their silly schemes is not enough, as DPUs (dumbest possible user) will eat what they are fed.
oh, one more thing. the latest WMP supposedly has a pretty bad mp3 decoder. whoops... all of a sudden, all these mp3's sound very bad... >>so sorry. why not use our tasty format?
ok, i cannot let this stand uncommented. while you are obviously not a religious freak of the sex-is-a-sin-sort, you still make some assumptions that i find outright false.
- on technical grounds, i don't think that it it statistically proven that porn excludes or in any way inhibits a long term relationhip.
- i don't think porn and one night stands can be put into one and the same category. porn is a fantasy, that can very well be enjoyed together with your faithful partner. one night stands (i assume you mean cheating on your partner) on the other hand seriously jeapardize the trust between two people, and are, IMHO, a sign something is seriously wrong with the relationship to begin with.
- the people photographed and filmed are for the most part not victimized people who regret what they are doing or hate their life. they are (sometimes highly paid) professionals, who do their job, just like other people do their jobs.
- i attribute all sexual victimization that _does_ happen on-screen (real amateurs, 16-year-olds, etc) not to the porn industry, as the demand for porn, high as it may be, can easily be satisfied by professional actors and actresses.
i believe that most victimization comes from the fact that our society tries to repress sexuality - this, for me, is the main cause that sex is often mixed up with violence and power. it shouldn't be - it should have nothing to do with either.
- i don't see why partners/spouses should be offended. if they are, then, in my opinion, they don't understand their partner or have low self-esteem. of they have low self-esteem, maybe the partner (who is watching porn secretly) doesn't give them the feeling they are appreciated.
- i cannot see what would be wrong with strange fantasies about women showing up and having sex with us. we all know it's a fantasy.
there are some problems i see in porn. there is lots and lots of really crappy porn out there - i would say 99.9% have nothing to do with an enjoyable sexual experience - that's not how people do it.
there is so much to sensuality, yet porn reflect but 0.1% of that. you get big plastic tits and men with really long shlongs doing some kind of gymnastics - it doesn't look enjoyable for either partner, and most likely isn't very, either. i don't want to tell people how to have sex, but i wish we had more variety, more sensuality, more erotics in porn. good porn is hard to find and rare.
my guess is that if america weren't so anti-sex and anti-fun, we would have quality directors and storytellers make good porn movies. and the world would be a better place for it.
do i know what i am talking about? well, i have been in a steady relationship with my girlfriend for 8 years, no cheating no lying, and sometimes (not very often actually - quality issues) watching porn together. i would not even think about trading her for some pornstar fantasy, not for one second.
sex is an expression of love, and we should cherish it in all it's forms. that includes but is not limited to: watching porn alone or with your partner and having sex alone or with your partner.
just, uh, FYI: they are working on it. not Lear, but there are several companies working on personal aircraft (google that for links). the concept is that computers prevent you from ramming things/other jets/the ground , and you get a joystick. nifty, eh?
... things like this only work where there is a very strong monopoly on a particular technology. the fact is, if all major producers of TVs band together and support this technology in a do-or-die fashion, there will be hundreds of upstarts from china, korea, even the US, who will happily jump in and provide what consumers want.
because the big companies are usually not willing to risk everything (literally) for a relatively small gain like controlling grey markets. what surprises me is that they try it over and over again.
the RIAA's/Napster conflict is different. the RIAA (thinks it) becomes obsolete with Napster, so it has to stage an all-or-nothing war. and even there, Bertelsmann is there to try and spoil the party. capitalism - sometimes it works.
nik
ps: Motorola, get back to speed up those PowerPCs! God, this company is lame...
key id is: 0xFAEBD5FC
that's him all right. i verified it myself using the plain text version. bad/. for screwing this up. just goes to show that people like phil are important because security is too complicated for the masses (including/. geeks)
Well, I understand your points, UNIX interface design was initially a bit poor.
there is a basic mistake that all unix/command-line geeks make. that is that something that's simple must be for beginners. there is also the underlying assumption that something that looks fun cannot be serious (and this was a major, major contributor to DOS in the beginning - it looked more serious than the MacOS).
unix "GUI"s like KDE and Gnome help convincing the unix geek that that stuff is mostly in the way. true. KDE, Gnome, XWindows are horrible and are mostly in the way, they are made by people who don't have a clue about user interface design and who are happy with 10 xterm sessions on one screen.
the mac is an entirely different category. sure, the tech underneath is crap (an i loathe that as much as any other geek), but the usability in term of getting stuff done is just way, way beyond unix. those who say otherwise have not used one for an extended period of time.
i have looked over the shoulders of unix gurus, sys-admins, super-hackers, watched them do stuff on their favorite OS. they all had their xterms and vi's and whatnot, their SGIs, linux boxes, sun's, AIXs. whenever they did something, anything, it took at least twice as long as it would have taken me on a mac. even the most basic things took a whole lot of typing and whatnot. and i have seen mac wizards whom the same things would take half as long as me.
MacOS is not for beginners. it has a _lot_ of depth, and over time one learns all the keyboard shortcuts for frequently used tasks, one optimizes the desktop, etc.
if you don't believe me, well then... keep on typing away! but don't confuse GUI with good user interface. a GUI can be just as screwed up as the worst command line interface.
nik
cars are only for beginners. real men ride horses.
people won't buy copyright-enforcing players. this is the grassroots approach to something consumers don't want. however, i think that capitalism itself will provide the tools that crush the SDMI, etc. - because people _will_ buy the players that don't enforce copyrights. and one day, the big companies have to play along or lose.
points in case:
- the DivX player. a stupid idea, died a very rapid death despite massive marketing.
- DVD. there are tons and tons of 'region-code free' players produced as we speak. Sony has no power over China. sooner or later, the region code (which was only a minor annoyance anyways) will be dead.
- mp3. Sony is producing CD players that can play mp3s now. they really hate to do that, but they had no choice. it was do or die.
once enough people don't like copyright-enforcing players, they will buy the players that don't. money will do the talking. the SDMI is fighting an uphill battle that cannot be won, no matter how powerful the organizations behind it are.
technical arguments for/against.NET are completely missing the point..NET is not about technology.
Microsoft has always played the same-old, same-old embrace-extend game. that and a hefty dose of FUD and bullying. anyone who has followed Microsoft closely for the last decade knows that.
on the other hand, consider that M$ is very successful doing what it's doing. therefore, it's NOT going to change.
it is not interesting whether or not.NET is a compelling technical alternative to Java. it does not need to be in order to win. to Microsoft, the inventor of.NET, the sole purpose is to hang on to its desktop monopoly.
i don't blame them: it is a valid (if sometimes ethically questionable) business strategy. and it has worked rather well in the past.
Microsoft has no reason to innovate. all it needs to do is hang on to it's license to print money (desktop OS monopoly). not surprisingly, for MS, that's where it's most sensible to focus ressources on.
i think the fact that cell phones don't really catch on here is more due to the fact that ATT and the other cell phone companies here can't get their heads out of their collective butts and offer good technology for a good price.
in europe, mobile companies are fighting no-holds-barred over every single customer. they have huge ad campaigns, excellent starting offers, really good voice quality etc. of course it's also helping things that landlines there cost as much as more than cell phones and the cell phones have more features (caller ID, SMS, call log, etc) and similar voice quality.
none of these is true for the US. land lines here are cheaper, voice quality on cell phones is horrible for the most part, and features either cost extra or are not available at all (SMS). so mobile phones are a lot less appealing, technologically about 5 years behind, and more expensive in the US.
compared to these factors, iMode or not iMode is next to irrelevant. if you have a phone, you want to use it as a phone first and foremost. in the US, the voice phone experience is just not compelling enough.
there is also a certain critical mass effect (that already affects teenagers here), in that a cell phone is a lot more useful if lots of people you know have one, too.
ricochet is a pretty clever technology. and most of all, it's cheap to install. i wonder why they don't offer Ricochet phones... they would be a lot better and a lot cheaper than the crap wireless companies here can offer.
i have ATT (former cellular one) in the bay area, and it's really ridiculous for the most part. quality is horrendous, service is spotty, customer service is lame. and the batteries are drained in 2 days.
used to have a mobile in europe. that one worked just like a regular phone, perfect sound quality, had SMS etc. it does not sound like much, but it makes a huge difference in usability.
my US phone is more like an emergency thing, i use it when no other phones are available. the one in europe was one i used exclusively, even when a landline was available. it was just so convenient...
and then they attached mirrors to their rockets...
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
was a good idea, but there are some flaws.
it's a personal helicopter!
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 1
looking at the comments of other readers, several other web pages, and the patents:
- it must have to do with transportation. it will be a _compelling_ alternative to cars (e.g. NO scooters or rollerblades - they exist today and people are not using them). the word compelling is significant here. there are tons of smart car alternatives already, none of them successful on a large scale. and it must have a higher sex appeal than cars.
- a new energy source/motor technology is involved. the patents and some articles hint at that. also, the remarks that big old companies (the oil industry?) will be trying to prevent the tech.
- cities will have to be redesigned.
- the inventor is an 'avid aviator who commutes via helicopter'.
it must be a personal helicopter/flying machine. something you strap to your back and fly to work. this is possible (and actually pretty simple) with current technology, provided you have a new super-efficient energy source/motor. take your super motor, add GPS and a bunch of computers so people can't crash into things, and voila!
the only thing that doesn't quite fit is that it can be transported in some cardboard boxes.
you can bet the MPAA and RIAA and all the other old monopolies are really pissed at apple right now.
even the dumbest idiot can copy CDs with these new tools. i don't think ripping DVDs was mentioned - e.g. it's probably not supported. but the recording features sure make copying a lot easier.
to sum it up:
- copying CDs got as easy as tying your shoe
- copying DVDs got a lot easier.
i question the entire notion of the west being a role model for third world countries. that third world contries need to take the exact same route to success that we took is indeed pretty stupid.
the facts are that we know these countries have very bad problems that we don't have over here. but we should admit, at least as a starting point, that we have no freakin' clue whatsoever how they should solve their problems. we don't.
i think grass-roots things like Geekcorps are in fact the only way we can help. they don't pretend to have an all-encompassing solution to all problems OR a five year plan on how to change everything. instead, they help where they can and they certainly don't do any damage. which can absolutely not be said for attempts at industrialization - those often did more harm than good.
humility, please. learn from the mistakes of the past.
1 - gladiator is highly overrated. cheesy beginning. good scenes of slaughter. extremely cheesy ending. it could have been good, if you just took the middle part. NO irony. very bad cg (whoever thinks that was good didn't see it on an IMAX screen like i did).
2 - ah-nold makes good movies. and horribly bad ones. it's about 50/50. the end of days was extremely horrible. eraser was really bad. total recall, true lies, terminator (even T2) were really good.... it's hit and miss. i do not want to talk about his attempts at comedy. it's too painful.
NBC is eager to get in on the deal as well. when asked about specifics, the NBC spokesperson told reporters to wait until prime time, when NBC will broadcast a time-delayed highlights-of the announcment. along with face-to-face stories about the decision makers, showing the human face of busy executives.
for the record: the only online game i am playing is Quake3, and most of the time i even only play demo 'cause i don't have the full version on all my machines.
cheaters don't bother me one bit. i see one in a game, i go to another arena. i do like that id is taking care to make cheating a lot harder. but just so as long as say, 80% of the games i visit are cheater-free, i am content with that.
sure, cheaters spoil a good game, and why anyone would do it is beyond me. what's the fun in that? on the other hand, when i am at the receiving end of a cheat it's either obvious (people flying around/ invisible/whatever) and i leave. or, if the cheat is good, like an aiming proxy that sometimes misses, it's fine with me.
i mean, there are only so many Threshs out there, and playing against someone with an undetectable cheating proxy is like playing against a super-pro (except you know there is something wrong if someone hits 99% with the rail gun and still gets hit by my rockets... ).
anyhow, i enjoy a challenge every day:-)
just make it so they have to go through a whole lot of effort to cheat.
Slashdot Mirror
apple is out of the hot water: OS X needs all the hardware you can throw at it, and more. 512M of RAM and a GHz G4 (not out yet) and the GeForce 3... and maybe, just maybe, it will be fast.
on the PC-front, i agree. my P2/266 with GeForce card is good enough for everything i need, from Word to IE to Win2k (even!) to Quake 3. only Doom3 will require an upgrade. for which, BTW, i will get a cheapo GHz Athlon for $800.
the point is that Apple, a company that makes money selling Hardware, *could* continue to do so using x86. Apple is not interested in becoming Microsoft - nor would they likely succeed (=> next, BE OS, ...).
if, say, motorola continues to suck as it does, and intel/AMD continue to get better all the time, that may just happen.
but back to my argument: if Apple were to switch to x86 _at all_, they would be better off with non-cloneable machines. they probably come up with a better concept than the proprietary ROM, but the point is, it's easily possible to make a proprietary x86 system.
more likely, though, is that apple switches to multiple processors, sort of trying to bridge the MHz gap that way. the MHz gap is hurting apple, and it looks like it will continue to get worse.
it's quite possible for Apple to run on x86 _without_ running on your cheapo PC box. just add proprietary ROM...
why? to continue to make their money with [cool] hardware while at the same time taking advantage of cheap and fast x86 processors.
so, yes, it may run on x86. but, no, that doesn't mean you can just install it on your Dell.
nik
let's look at the facts:
- M$ wants to cripple mp3 in favor of its own format
- this format sounds better in 64k than mp3 in 64k. big deal. i only listen to 192k and better music. at this bitrate, WMA is on par or lower quality than mp3 (depending on which review you trust).
- the format is copy protected, so i am in for a hassle whenever i want to make a copy for the car, windows crashes or has bugs, i want to listen to something before i buy...
- it is also owned by microsoft, whereas mp3 is owned by no-one and guaranteed to be there even if microsoft, IBM and Intel all simultaneously die.
- microsoft's sole and single purpose for this new format is to cash in on music purchased over the internet. M$ doesn't deny that, or even attempt to.
considering the history of the company and it's limitless megalomania - they even tried to _own_ the net, remember? - the only possible response is to bash the hell out of them. ignoring their silly schemes is not enough, as DPUs (dumbest possible user) will eat what they are fed.
oh, one more thing. the latest WMP supposedly has a pretty bad mp3 decoder. whoops... all of a sudden, all these mp3's sound very bad... >>so sorry. why not use our tasty format?
ok, i cannot let this stand uncommented. while you are obviously not a religious freak of the sex-is-a-sin-sort, you still make some assumptions that i find outright false.
- on technical grounds, i don't think that it it statistically proven that porn excludes or in any way inhibits a long term relationhip.
- i don't think porn and one night stands can be put into one and the same category. porn is a fantasy, that can very well be enjoyed together with your faithful partner. one night stands (i assume you mean cheating on your partner) on the other hand seriously jeapardize the trust between two people, and are, IMHO, a sign something is seriously wrong with the relationship to begin with.
- the people photographed and filmed are for the most part not victimized people who regret what they are doing or hate their life. they are (sometimes highly paid) professionals, who do their job, just like other people do their jobs.
- i attribute all sexual victimization that _does_ happen on-screen (real amateurs, 16-year-olds, etc) not to the porn industry, as the demand for porn, high as it may be, can easily be satisfied by professional actors and actresses.
i believe that most victimization comes from the fact that our society tries to repress sexuality - this, for me, is the main cause that sex is often mixed up with violence and power. it shouldn't be - it should have nothing to do with either.
- i don't see why partners/spouses should be offended. if they are, then, in my opinion, they don't understand their partner or have low self-esteem. of they have low self-esteem, maybe the partner (who is watching porn secretly) doesn't give them the feeling they are appreciated.
- i cannot see what would be wrong with strange fantasies about women showing up and having sex with us. we all know it's a fantasy.
there are some problems i see in porn. there is lots and lots of really crappy porn out there - i would say 99.9% have nothing to do with an enjoyable sexual experience - that's not how people do it.
there is so much to sensuality, yet porn reflect but 0.1% of that. you get big plastic tits and men with really long shlongs doing some kind of gymnastics - it doesn't look enjoyable for either partner, and most likely isn't very, either. i don't want to tell people how to have sex, but i wish we had more variety, more sensuality, more erotics in porn. good porn is hard to find and rare.
my guess is that if america weren't so anti-sex and anti-fun, we would have quality directors and storytellers make good porn movies. and the world would be a better place for it.
do i know what i am talking about? well, i have been in a steady relationship with my girlfriend for 8 years, no cheating no lying, and sometimes (not very often actually - quality issues) watching porn together. i would not even think about trading her for some pornstar fantasy, not for one second.
sex is an expression of love, and we should cherish it in all it's forms. that includes but is not limited to: watching porn alone or with your partner and having sex alone or with your partner.
cell phones are the ultimate platform for porn. they vibrate, and are small enough to... uh.. never mind.
nik
according to another poster here, it costs $1M. *slightly* more than a workstation.
the NYT is now officially slashdotted. :-)
just, uh, FYI: they are working on it. not Lear, but there are several companies working on personal aircraft (google that for links). the concept is that computers prevent you from ramming things/other jets/the ground , and you get a joystick. nifty, eh?
nik
... things like this only work where there is a very strong monopoly on a particular technology. the fact is, if all major producers of TVs band together and support this technology in a do-or-die fashion, there will be hundreds of upstarts from china, korea, even the US, who will happily jump in and provide what consumers want.
because the big companies are usually not willing to risk everything (literally) for a relatively small gain like controlling grey markets. what surprises me is that they try it over and over again.
the RIAA's/Napster conflict is different. the RIAA (thinks it) becomes obsolete with Napster, so it has to stage an all-or-nothing war. and even there, Bertelsmann is there to try and spoil the party. capitalism - sometimes it works.
nik
ps: Motorola, get back to speed up those PowerPCs! God, this company is lame...
key id is: 0xFAEBD5FC /. for screwing this up. just goes to show that people like phil are important because security is too complicated for the masses (including /. geeks)
that's him all right. i verified it myself using the plain text version. bad
Well, I understand your points, UNIX interface design was initially a bit poor.
there is a basic mistake that all unix/command-line geeks make. that is that something that's simple must be for beginners. there is also the underlying assumption that something that looks fun cannot be serious (and this was a major, major contributor to DOS in the beginning - it looked more serious than the MacOS).
unix "GUI"s like KDE and Gnome help convincing the unix geek that that stuff is mostly in the way. true. KDE, Gnome, XWindows are horrible and are mostly in the way, they are made by people who don't have a clue about user interface design and who are happy with 10 xterm sessions on one screen.
the mac is an entirely different category. sure, the tech underneath is crap (an i loathe that as much as any other geek), but the usability in term of getting stuff done is just way, way beyond unix. those who say otherwise have not used one for an extended period of time.
i have looked over the shoulders of unix gurus, sys-admins, super-hackers, watched them do stuff on their favorite OS. they all had their xterms and vi's and whatnot, their SGIs, linux boxes, sun's, AIXs. whenever they did something, anything, it took at least twice as long as it would have taken me on a mac. even the most basic things took a whole lot of typing and whatnot. and i have seen mac wizards whom the same things would take half as long as me.
MacOS is not for beginners. it has a _lot_ of depth, and over time one learns all the keyboard shortcuts for frequently used tasks, one optimizes the desktop, etc.
if you don't believe me, well then... keep on typing away! but don't confuse GUI with good user interface. a GUI can be just as screwed up as the worst command line interface.
nik
cars are only for beginners. real men ride horses.
people won't buy copyright-enforcing players. this is the grassroots approach to something consumers don't want. however, i think that capitalism itself will provide the tools that crush the SDMI, etc. - because people _will_ buy the players that don't enforce copyrights. and one day, the big companies have to play along or lose.
points in case:
- the DivX player. a stupid idea, died a very rapid death despite massive marketing.
- DVD. there are tons and tons of 'region-code free' players produced as we speak. Sony has no power over China. sooner or later, the region code (which was only a minor annoyance anyways) will be dead.
- mp3. Sony is producing CD players that can play mp3s now. they really hate to do that, but they had no choice. it was do or die.
once enough people don't like copyright-enforcing players, they will buy the players that don't. money will do the talking. the SDMI is fighting an uphill battle that cannot be won, no matter how powerful the organizations behind it are.
technical arguments for/against .NET are completely missing the point. .NET is not about technology.
.NET is a compelling technical alternative to Java. it does not need to be in order to win. to Microsoft, the inventor of .NET, the sole purpose is to hang on to its desktop monopoly.
Microsoft has always played the same-old, same-old embrace-extend game. that and a hefty dose of FUD and bullying. anyone who has followed Microsoft closely for the last decade knows that.
on the other hand, consider that M$ is very successful doing what it's doing. therefore, it's NOT going to change.
it is not interesting whether or not
i don't blame them: it is a valid (if sometimes ethically questionable) business strategy. and it has worked rather well in the past.
Microsoft has no reason to innovate. all it needs to do is hang on to it's license to print money (desktop OS monopoly). not surprisingly, for MS, that's where it's most sensible to focus ressources on.
i think the fact that cell phones don't really catch on here is more due to the fact that ATT and the other cell phone companies here can't get their heads out of their collective butts and offer good technology for a good price.
in europe, mobile companies are fighting no-holds-barred over every single customer. they have huge ad campaigns, excellent starting offers, really good voice quality etc. of course it's also helping things that landlines there cost as much as more than cell phones and the cell phones have more features (caller ID, SMS, call log, etc) and similar voice quality.
none of these is true for the US. land lines here are cheaper, voice quality on cell phones is horrible for the most part, and features either cost extra or are not available at all (SMS). so mobile phones are a lot less appealing, technologically about 5 years behind, and more expensive in the US.
compared to these factors, iMode or not iMode is next to irrelevant. if you have a phone, you want to use it as a phone first and foremost. in the US, the voice phone experience is just not compelling enough.
there is also a certain critical mass effect (that already affects teenagers here), in that a cell phone is a lot more useful if lots of people you know have one, too.
nik
ricochet is a pretty clever technology. and most of all, it's cheap to install. i wonder why they don't offer Ricochet phones... they would be a lot better and a lot cheaper than the crap wireless companies here can offer.
i have ATT (former cellular one) in the bay area, and it's really ridiculous for the most part. quality is horrendous, service is spotty, customer service is lame. and the batteries are drained in 2 days.
used to have a mobile in europe. that one worked just like a regular phone, perfect sound quality, had SMS etc. it does not sound like much, but it makes a huge difference in usability.
my US phone is more like an emergency thing, i use it when no other phones are available. the one in europe was one i used exclusively, even when a landline was available. it was just so convenient...
was a good idea, but there are some flaws.
looking at the comments of other readers, several other web pages, and the patents:
- it must have to do with transportation. it will be a _compelling_ alternative to cars (e.g. NO scooters or rollerblades - they exist today and people are not using them). the word compelling is significant here. there are tons of smart car alternatives already, none of them successful on a large scale. and it must have a higher sex appeal than cars.
- a new energy source/motor technology is involved. the patents and some articles hint at that. also, the remarks that big old companies (the oil industry?) will be trying to prevent the tech.
- cities will have to be redesigned.
- the inventor is an 'avid aviator who commutes via helicopter'.
it must be a personal helicopter/flying machine. something you strap to your back and fly to work. this is possible (and actually pretty simple) with current technology, provided you have a new super-efficient energy source/motor. take your super motor, add GPS and a bunch of computers so people can't crash into things, and voila!
the only thing that doesn't quite fit is that it can be transported in some cardboard boxes.
you can bet the MPAA and RIAA and all the other old monopolies are really pissed at apple right now.
even the dumbest idiot can copy CDs with these new tools. i don't think ripping DVDs was mentioned - e.g. it's probably not supported. but the recording features sure make copying a lot easier.
to sum it up:
- copying CDs got as easy as tying your shoe
- copying DVDs got a lot easier.
you can bet they are pissed! hehehehe....
i question the entire notion of the west being a role model for third world countries. that third world contries need to take the exact same route to success that we took is indeed pretty stupid.
the facts are that we know these countries have very bad problems that we don't have over here. but we should admit, at least as a starting point, that we have no freakin' clue whatsoever how they should solve their problems. we don't.
i think grass-roots things like Geekcorps are in fact the only way we can help. they don't pretend to have an all-encompassing solution to all problems OR a five year plan on how to change everything. instead, they help where they can and they certainly don't do any damage. which can absolutely not be said for attempts at industrialization - those often did more harm than good.
humility, please. learn from the mistakes of the past.
1 - gladiator is highly overrated. cheesy beginning. good scenes of slaughter. extremely cheesy ending. it could have been good, if you just took the middle part. NO irony. very bad cg (whoever thinks that was good didn't see it on an IMAX screen like i did).
2 - ah-nold makes good movies. and horribly bad ones. it's about 50/50. the end of days was extremely horrible. eraser was really bad. total recall, true lies, terminator (even T2) were really good.... it's hit and miss. i do not want to talk about his attempts at comedy. it's too painful.
the DOD pays $36M per year and has 20.000 phones. so they pay
36.000.000,-/20.000=1800USDannually for each phone
which comes out to
=> $150 / month, unlimited minutes, works world-wide.
now, if you ask me, the DOD has made an excellent deal here. plus, they get encryption and independence of local networks thrown in for free.
hey, i would go for a cell phone like that any day!
mod this up!! i love it!! :-))
NBC is eager to get in on the deal as well. when asked about specifics, the NBC spokesperson told reporters to wait until prime time, when NBC will broadcast a time-delayed highlights-of the announcment. along with face-to-face stories about the decision makers, showing the human face of busy executives.
"... slashdot takes care of the remaining 40%. we just link to this aussie page, that should do it."
for the record: the only online game i am playing is Quake3, and most of the time i even only play demo 'cause i don't have the full version on all my machines.
:-)
cheaters don't bother me one bit. i see one in a game, i go to another arena. i do like that id is taking care to make cheating a lot harder. but just so as long as say, 80% of the games i visit are cheater-free, i am content with that.
sure, cheaters spoil a good game, and why anyone would do it is beyond me. what's the fun in that? on the other hand, when i am at the receiving end of a cheat it's either obvious (people flying around/ invisible/whatever) and i leave. or, if the cheat is good, like an aiming proxy that sometimes misses, it's fine with me.
i mean, there are only so many Threshs out there, and playing against someone with an undetectable cheating proxy is like playing against a super-pro (except you know there is something wrong if someone hits 99% with the rail gun and still gets hit by my rockets... ).
anyhow, i enjoy a challenge every day
just make it so they have to go through a whole lot of effort to cheat.