Both of the lifetime licenses are locked to the box, and go with the box if you give it away, sell it, or move it, or if it dies*.
--Blair
* - so if they write software that makes you think your unit is dying and you have to buy another one, bingo, they just sold another license. But no, really, they just sold a competitor's unit. See?
Re:Yeah right, and
on
Net Vegas
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The racetrack heist was an inside job by a guy with the password to the database. That sort of security problem will be with us until we get the human factor completely out of the system from conception to implementation to validation.
And then there will be no need for money, because the human slaves of the master machines don't have time off to shop.
It's a stupid nested name-value pair text databasing system.
That'd be like inventing the sentence.
Lets hope they designed this one right.
on
Airborne Mouse
·
· Score: 2
I had a GyroPoint for about a year, and finally tossed it because it was always a little bit dysfunctional due to battery voltage issues, then finally refused to hold a charge even with new NiCads. I got the impression it was a common fault in their products.
If they have pirate ships, we can have privateers, and sink them.
Dragon's Lair's graphics?
on
High Score
·
· Score: 2
Dragon's Lair didn't have "graphics". It was a database of hand-animated film clips strung together by the choices the user made during the game.
The game was cool, and the cartoons were cool, and the fact that they could make it run that way was cool, but from a purely graphical standpoint there was nothing innovative going on.
Did they do it by measuring muscle response near the muscle, or by measurng neural activity near the spine? Because if it's the latter, you could amputate that monkey's arm, replace it with the waldo, hook it up, and the monkey wouldn't know the difference, grabbing-a-banana wise. He'd just move the arm.
But then again, maybe they're not recording individual neurons, just some gross wavepatterns, which means it'd be no more "controlling a limb" than letting your dog drive is the Indy 500.
Last night, I was sitting on the sofa watching the game, and I glanced over and saw this headline on the front of the magazine, and something about wondercars, and another fluffy sensationalist barely scientific come-on.
And I thought it was the latest issue of Popular Science, which it turned out was was right underneath this issue of Scientific American.
Seriously. If you covered up the name, and don't have the UPC memorized, you couldn't hope to tell them apart. They used the same layout template for the covers. And maybe for their websites, because both covers are in about the same spot on their home page:
Software tests are the other half. And both are only half of the effort put into them.
Software costs a lot because people think it's easy to put an idea down in a piece of code. But the code you end up with is a reflection of the sculpting of the code you started with. And you have to write at least an equivalent amount of just-as-well-sculpted code in order to test that the original code works.
So one piece of running software costs twice as much to write from scratch as you'd think just from looking at the spec, and another twice as much to test properly. Three times if you need exhaustive testing under load.
Add 1 more unit if you want it documented properly. 2 more if you want the tests documented.
And then, if you're going to certify it for flight or safety, add another two to five units for the reviews of the software, the tests, the documentation, and of the reviews themselves.
Nominally, figure 2x for working code, 4X for tested code, 5X for tested, documented code, and 7X-10X for certified code (that will still have bugs but most of them will be documented and approved).
And then modulate it by the quality of your managers. Your wizards may do in a day what your lusers will take a month to get right. Wizards don't come cheap, for a reason. The great management smoke-in of 2000-2001 resulted in a lot of lusers being hired for Wizard pay. The backlash is occurring now. Bad managers estimate poorly and either overpay or underschedule. Managers that do the opposite are good by definition. And there's no way to prove managers except by trial and error.
$100 for a "line of code" in a cockpit system isn't unusual, and isn't unreasonable, considering how many uses you can get out of it, and the price of failure.
It can talk all four legs off an Arcturan megadonkey, but only I can convince it to go for a walk afterwards.
Re:try saying this code isn't free speech
on
Open Source Art?
·
· Score: 2
Sure, a paintbrush can be art.
But it would be really interesting only to people who understand why it's art and not just a paintbrush.
Like movies about people making movies. Or the Animaniacs. The rest of us are curious, maybe amused and entertained, but only Spielberg and Scorsese really get it.
Gimme a slice. This will either suck, rock, or bore. No, it will bore and suck for 58 minutes, then be exciting for 10 seconds, then it will be over. Then AC Neilsen will count the suckers and collect.
Slashdot Mirror
Both have "lifetime" subs for $249 or $250:
c om/support/activation.asp
http://www.tivo.com/3.0.asp
http://www.replay.
Both of the lifetime licenses are locked to the box, and go with the box if you give it away, sell it, or move it, or if it dies*.
--Blair
* - so if they write software that makes you think your unit is dying and you have to buy another one, bingo, they just sold another license. But no, really, they just sold a competitor's unit. See?
The racetrack heist was an inside job by a guy with the password to the database. That sort of security problem will be with us until we get the human factor completely out of the system from conception to implementation to validation.
And then there will be no need for money, because the human slaves of the master machines don't have time off to shop.
The American Version will do it 48% faster and not try to compare itself to the Canadian version.
Yeah.
When your Mac locks up, you can rest secure in the knowledge that it's got the best form, fit, and finish of any locked-up Mac in the cubicle.
--Blair
It's a stupid nested name-value pair text databasing system.
That'd be like inventing the sentence.
I had a GyroPoint for about a year, and finally tossed it because it was always a little bit dysfunctional due to battery voltage issues, then finally refused to hold a charge even with new NiCads. I got the impression it was a common fault in their products.
...who let George Lucas turn Star Wars into the thing it is today?
I trust him about as far as I can throw a bantha.
Without using the Force.
--Blair
You're going to need an Oscillation Overthruster.
My buddy John can get one for you.
What would you pay a guy to give you a free shot at kicking his ass?
Consider it a fee for flesh rendered.
You've been watching too much Technicolor.
The definition of Privateer has no requirement that the privateer be a pirate.
--Blair
If they have pirate ships, we can have privateers, and sink them.
Dragon's Lair didn't have "graphics". It was a database of hand-animated film clips strung together by the choices the user made during the game.
The game was cool, and the cartoons were cool, and the fact that they could make it run that way was cool, but from a purely graphical standpoint there was nothing innovative going on.
--Blair
How far will it go on $15 and 2 minutes per week of refueling labor?
It's less than Madonna's first big contract with Sony. It's a small fraction of Michael Jackson's contracts. It's not much more than Mariah Carey got.
It's Tommy Mottola's wall-safe money.
The lawyers get a third, the rest of us get 50-cents-off coupons for Chicago MCMXVIIIII.
Install a cache server for the "entertainment" traffic and connect it to the nearest backbone.
I mean, if your campus is so popular with the downloaders...
I haven't read it.
Did they do it by measuring muscle response near the muscle, or by measurng neural activity near the spine? Because if it's the latter, you could amputate that monkey's arm, replace it with the waldo, hook it up, and the monkey wouldn't know the difference, grabbing-a-banana wise. He'd just move the arm.
But then again, maybe they're not recording individual neurons, just some gross wavepatterns, which means it'd be no more "controlling a limb" than letting your dog drive is the Indy 500.
--Blair
Last night, I was sitting on the sofa watching the game, and I glanced over and saw this headline on the front of the magazine, and something about wondercars, and another fluffy sensationalist barely scientific come-on.
And I thought it was the latest issue of Popular Science, which it turned out was was right underneath this issue of Scientific American.
Seriously. If you covered up the name, and don't have the UPC memorized, you couldn't hope to tell them apart. They used the same layout template for the covers. And maybe for their websites, because both covers are in about the same spot on their home page:
exhibit A.
exhibit B.
Scientific American should never have started taking ads.
--Blair
More persistent-looking links to the cover thumbnails:
sa
ps
Software tests are the other half. And both are only half of the effort put into them.
Software costs a lot because people think it's easy to put an idea down in a piece of code. But the code you end up with is a reflection of the sculpting of the code you started with. And you have to write at least an equivalent amount of just-as-well-sculpted code in order to test that the original code works.
So one piece of running software costs twice as much to write from scratch as you'd think just from looking at the spec, and another twice as much to test properly. Three times if you need exhaustive testing under load.
Add 1 more unit if you want it documented properly. 2 more if you want the tests documented.
And then, if you're going to certify it for flight or safety, add another two to five units for the reviews of the software, the tests, the documentation, and of the reviews themselves.
Nominally, figure 2x for working code, 4X for tested code, 5X for tested, documented code, and 7X-10X for certified code (that will still have bugs but most of them will be documented and approved).
And then modulate it by the quality of your managers. Your wizards may do in a day what your lusers will take a month to get right. Wizards don't come cheap, for a reason. The great management smoke-in of 2000-2001 resulted in a lot of lusers being hired for Wizard pay. The backlash is occurring now. Bad managers estimate poorly and either overpay or underschedule. Managers that do the opposite are good by definition. And there's no way to prove managers except by trial and error.
$100 for a "line of code" in a cockpit system isn't unusual, and isn't unreasonable, considering how many uses you can get out of it, and the price of failure.
It can talk all four legs off an Arcturan megadonkey, but only I can convince it to go for a walk afterwards.
Sure, a paintbrush can be art.
But it would be really interesting only to people who understand why it's art and not just a paintbrush.
Like movies about people making movies. Or the Animaniacs. The rest of us are curious, maybe amused and entertained, but only Spielberg and Scorsese really get it.
--Blair
Seriously.
How hard would it be for the record-store owner to peel that "not for resale" sticker off the packaging?
So why is it there? Because the cachet of having a review copy is worth at least 50c pure cash profit.
I could sell those stickers for a dime apiece, but the music industry is slimy, so I won't.
--Blair
I did my Masters' thesis on an analog amplified system using a standard CMOS process. They're just transistors. Nothing magical here.
--Blair
Gimme a slice. This will either suck, rock, or bore. No, it will bore and suck for 58 minutes, then be exciting for 10 seconds, then it will be over. Then AC Neilsen will count the suckers and collect.
The network is capable of preventing crime, and now someone's actually doing it.
A dollar price rise on something I may buy nine of in my entire life is about the least important news since Bill Gates' "losing" $11 billion in 2001.