Windows CE/embedded/etc../ would all be candidates for the telematics market. That would make them, if successful, GM parts suppliers. If they aren't currently GM parts suppliers, that is due to their own shortcomings.
Understanding isn't necessarily reflected in actions; but in this case I think flogging the censorship horse is a bit out of touch.
I think Apple bans apps based on brand positioning rather than morality or deference to authority. In short, they identify their products with creative, intelligent, well off people. They want people to envision their products fitting in at a well lit coffee shop with too many plants. They don't want people to think iphone==mini porn device, or imagine a "fondle slab" in a trench coat.
Will they ban it? Depends what they view the net effect of banning it will be on their brand. In this way, they aren't different from other businesses.
If you take exception to their practices, nobody has impinged upon your freedom to not be their customer.
About 6 years ago GreenPeace did an article decrying the excess packaging of Apple products. Apple rejigged their packaging almost instantly. Not necessarily due to morality, certainly due to an image issue important to their base.
I'm glad it has a laser signature to help find it.
Heaven forbid, I assume this is another nightmare weapon made for a world overcrowded with weapons and nobody with a clue about what to do with them.
Surely LHM made this as a hide-and-seek companion for busy couples with lonely kids.
I know it doesn't fit into LHM's business model, but can't somebody stop this insanity and spend 1/10^6 as much money on figuring out how to prevent conflict?
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", goes the old saying, but it doesn't pay the bills.
I. Are you trying to say that a belief in God and a literal belief in some book are the same thing?
II. I think the post you replied to was meant in jest - a kind of quick comedic quip or bon mot - to illustrate the silly nature of people waiting for the next bit of ammunition to bolster their side in an argument. Even in his jest, he did isolation creationists, which are a small subset of people who have a belief in a god or supreme being. Creationists are not necessarily 'backwards morons'; but I don't think it is too much of a stretch to assert the contra-positive - 'backwards morons' are likely creationists. [ apologies to John Stuart Mill ]. Naive understanding is likely the key to creationism; and for want of a non-religious analogy, lets pretend I believe in Quantum Physics. According to QP, at every event, the entire universe splits many times, reflecting the likelihood of the result of that event. In this belief, if I jumped off of the roof of a building, in some universes, I would fly away like a bird. In a smaller set of universes, my consciousness would transfer across to the 'bird-me', thus although many-mes would splatter on the pavement, I would still enjoy the continued experience of flying like a bird. That is clearly a ridiculous interpretation of the mathematics behind QP; however, a naive literalist may not see that.
III. The world has space for many beliefs; be it flying pasta-farians, people eating dinosaur steaks, or plummeting physicists, the nice thing is that there is room for all of us. Sure, 'outlier' beliefs will take some good natured knocking here and there, but that is just part of the fun of being alive. I don't need you to like getting high and listening to Pink Floyd for hours on end; you don't need me to help get the word out. We can all live quite happily.
At some point everyone accepts bellwethers. I don't have Republicans or Democrats to lean on, but there are many others. If Reverend Phelps states something, I don't have to think much to disagree - history has shown we don't have much in common, and most of what he advocates, I disagree with. Closer to home, the current PM of Canada has a handy habit of coming out on the wrong side of pretty much everything. It saves time, I don't have to read much to know what is right.
I don't think you can blame him if he comes down on the anti-Republican side - they have committed so many heinous crimes from treason to torture, that it is a safe bet to just oppose them. They tend to be wrong.
Why wouldn't this mythical device be applicable to medical devices? It seems there are a dozen other industries you left off your list, is it not potentially applicable to them either?
There is nothing distinguishing about any of the examples noted; nor worth any study. I don't deny that the mathematics::programming link of overstressed. Seems the problems are more rooted in basic experience. Many arts understand that imitate comes before create; despite the whining of the student/apprentices. While programming isn't quite an Art, its practice is close enough to deserve a different approach from the basic sciences.
Certainly the root of all evil is falling into the buzz-trap where studying and instance of a technology (java, cloud computing, multi-core(wtf?)) takes the place of learning something worthwhile, like planning, design, debugging.
Yes, but only in the sense of "a ship on the beach is a lighthouse to the sea." ----- Q: So the problem is fat cats infatuated with expensive, unnecessary products? A: Exactly. Only now it's cropping up in Asia, too.
1. Are you disgusted by what you see as undaunted loyalty to a brand, or because you feel he is misrepresenting the facts?
2. Either way, I agree the frustration inherent in these kinds of debates. I find that these contests are a bit like the weird pulling locomotives 20 years with your teeth. It is a big event with all sorts of interest, but it doesn't have the decisive conclusion of a real sporting event. Personally, my favourites are jousting and duellling, as there is little interpretation to make of the outcome.
3. Maybe there is a way in which these sorts of contests can be made a bit more rigorous, at least in the interpretation of results. The way it is currently is a bit like a bowling tournament or an awards show where everybody gets a prize for something and everybody feels a bit humiliated. It might involve raising the stakes [ ie. each vendor has to submit a VP who will be sacrificed if their product loses ]; or a pre-established agreement on the interpretation of the outcome.
1. What do you mean by feeding the trolls? I'm sure you don't really want them to starve to death.
2. I agree with you that it is difficult to have to put up with trolls. I hope, however, that the inner-tubes are big enough for everyone; maybe we can work together to find a nice bridge for the trolls to live under. It may seem a bit harsh, but if we fed them a few goats now and again, maybe they will feel better about themselves and move on to greener pastures.
3. If we can keep the trolls from offending us, then cyber-area can benefit from the diversity. I saw a documentary once where even an Ogre - I know they are different from trolls, but they share some common disagreeable characteristics - befriended a donkey, and they seemed to have a genuinely witty banter and joie de vivre. I read in the newspaper that the Ogre recently even married; so there is some possibility we can live together.
I see where you are going, and its dangerous territory.
Try to follow along: 1. Windows is the most secure OS ever. 2. Because it has a 90+% of the market, it attracts 100% of malware. 3. If even 1% of those malware writers targeted {other os} the world would be awash in {other os} viruses. 4. It is a good thing Windows is there to attract all this malfeasance.
So, we clear? Now, don't bother with any more pesky thinking and there won't be any problems.
I've never asked anything of you; please try to find something even more 'asshattish' than this and bit by bit the world becomes a better place.... I know you have it in you.
Computers can solve simple problems immediately. Difficult problems take a bit longer. If we could simplify difficult problems, computers could solve them immediately. One type of difficult problem which has a possibility to be simplified is the NP type.
The possibility is so small that he may be better to donate to a humanitarian cause. The humanitarian cause may help someone survive that can answer this question. Even if they can't, he at least helped them survive.
andrea noted that the interface was:.... nice to watch but utterly useless. which inspired maird to assert: There is the proof....
You see, maird was saying that the demonstration of something pretty but useless stands as proof that its in the new Windows. The implication is that Windows releases have been dominated by attractive, but worthless items.
By responding to andreas comment with this statement, maird successfully introduced a discontinuity, which the reader may perceive as a delightful surprise, sometimes reacting with laughter. In the traditional world, where this discourse may have occurred around a fire, Mairds companions may have slapped him affectionately on the back, making cooing sounds about wittiness and "bons mots". In this disconnected world "+5 funny" is the depressing equivalent.
Some interpret the delightful surprise as a confusing consternation; often spurning an irrepressible desire to resolve the ambiguity. While this activity in itself is also quite funny, it is more the sad kind of funny.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows CE/embedded/etc../ would all be candidates for the telematics market. That would make them, if successful, GM parts suppliers. If they aren't currently GM parts suppliers, that is due to their own shortcomings.
It looks like MS is restocking its FUD armoury.
Understanding isn't necessarily reflected in actions; but in this case I think flogging the censorship horse is a bit out of touch.
I think Apple bans apps based on brand positioning rather than morality or deference to authority. In short, they identify their products with creative, intelligent, well off people. They want people to envision their products fitting in at a well lit coffee shop with too many plants.
They don't want people to think iphone==mini porn device, or imagine a "fondle slab" in a trench coat.
Will they ban it? Depends what they view the net effect of banning it will be on their brand. In this way, they aren't different from other businesses.
If you take exception to their practices, nobody has impinged upon your freedom to not be their customer.
About 6 years ago GreenPeace did an article decrying the excess packaging of Apple products. Apple rejigged their packaging almost instantly. Not necessarily due to morality, certainly due to an image issue important to their base.
I'm glad it has a laser signature to help find it.
Heaven forbid, I assume this is another nightmare weapon made for a world overcrowded with weapons and nobody with a clue about what to do with them.
Surely LHM made this as a hide-and-seek companion for busy couples with lonely kids.
I know it doesn't fit into LHM's business model, but can't somebody stop this insanity and spend 1/10^6 as much money on figuring out how to prevent conflict?
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", goes the old saying, but it doesn't pay the bills.
I. Are you trying to say that a belief in God and a literal belief in some book are the same thing?
II. I think the post you replied to was meant in jest - a kind of quick comedic quip or bon mot - to illustrate the silly nature of people waiting for the next bit of ammunition to bolster their side in an argument.
Even in his jest, he did isolation creationists, which are a small subset of people who have a belief in a god or supreme being. Creationists are not necessarily 'backwards morons'; but I don't think it is too much of a stretch to assert the contra-positive - 'backwards morons' are likely creationists. [ apologies to John Stuart Mill ].
Naive understanding is likely the key to creationism; and for want of a non-religious analogy, lets pretend I believe in Quantum Physics.
According to QP, at every event, the entire universe splits many times, reflecting the likelihood of the result of that event. In this belief, if I jumped off of the roof of a building, in some universes, I would fly away like a bird.
In a smaller set of universes, my consciousness would transfer across to the 'bird-me', thus although many-mes would splatter on the pavement, I would still enjoy the continued experience of flying like a bird.
That is clearly a ridiculous interpretation of the mathematics behind QP; however, a naive literalist may not see that.
III. The world has space for many beliefs; be it flying pasta-farians, people eating dinosaur steaks, or plummeting physicists, the nice thing is that there is room for all of us. Sure, 'outlier' beliefs will take some good natured knocking here and there, but that is just part of the fun of being alive. I don't need you to like getting high and listening to Pink Floyd for hours on end; you don't need me to help get the word out. We can all live quite happily.
There will always be a desire to kill. Its how humans avoid resolving problems, and the wealthy (Trump - get it :) stay in power.
oops. I didn't read the article. Two days after another questionable military assault has started, I could only think of one application.
I apologize to the little toadies, and hope you save many lives with this. Can I control it from my iPhone?
so by spoofing its gps and blinding its image sensors, I can send it after the sick little toadie that built this shit?
Seriously, what is wrong with you people? There are real problems that need to be solved before creating a whole host of new ones...
At some point everyone accepts bellwethers. I don't have Republicans or Democrats to lean on, but there are many others.
If Reverend Phelps states something, I don't have to think much to disagree - history has shown we don't have much in common, and most of what he advocates, I disagree with.
Closer to home, the current PM of Canada has a handy habit of coming out on the wrong side of pretty much everything. It saves time, I don't have to read much to know what is right.
I don't think you can blame him if he comes down on the anti-Republican side - they have committed so many heinous crimes from treason to torture, that it is a safe bet to just oppose them. They tend to be wrong.
UN: Uhh, House of Saud, we think we should invade you.
HoS: Who is your daddy?
too late.
- cleaning under your finger nails.
- a filter for your joints.
- a way of remembering where you worked.
- shimming wobbly furniture.
really, the list is endless..
Why wouldn't this mythical device be applicable to medical devices? It seems there are a dozen other industries you left off your list, is it not potentially applicable to them either?
There is nothing distinguishing about any of the examples noted; nor worth any study. I don't deny that the mathematics::programming link of overstressed.
Seems the problems are more rooted in basic experience. Many arts understand that imitate comes before create; despite the whining of the student/apprentices. While programming isn't quite an Art, its practice is close enough to deserve a different approach from the basic sciences.
Certainly the root of all evil is falling into the buzz-trap where studying and instance of a technology (java, cloud computing, multi-core(wtf?)) takes the place of learning something worthwhile, like planning, design, debugging.
bah, get off my lawn.
Yes, but only in the sense of "a ship on the beach is a lighthouse to the sea."
-----
Q: So the problem is fat cats infatuated with expensive, unnecessary products?
A: Exactly. Only now it's cropping up in Asia, too.
1. Are you disgusted by what you see as undaunted loyalty to a brand, or because you feel he is misrepresenting the facts?
2. Either way, I agree the frustration inherent in these kinds of debates. I find that these contests are a bit like the weird pulling locomotives 20 years with your teeth. It is a big event with all sorts of interest, but it doesn't have the decisive conclusion of a real sporting event.
Personally, my favourites are jousting and duellling, as there is little interpretation to make of the outcome.
3. Maybe there is a way in which these sorts of contests can be made a bit more rigorous, at least in the interpretation of results. The way it is currently is a bit like a bowling tournament or an awards show where everybody gets a prize for something and everybody feels a bit humiliated.
It might involve raising the stakes [ ie. each vendor has to submit a VP who will be sacrificed if their product loses ]; or a pre-established agreement on the interpretation of the outcome.
Hey, maybe there is something to this:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/03/06/2142233/Disarm-Internet-Trolls-Gently
For formally recognizing that democracy has no place in the USA.
.... there is no substitute.....
and apparently followed a similar path to NASA GLORY....
http://comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2011/3/comScore_Reports_January_2011_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share
Although the raw drop from 9.7% to 8% looks like a slight dip; remember that it really a more precipitous 17+% drop in its market.
1. What do you mean by feeding the trolls? I'm sure you don't really want them to starve to death.
2. I agree with you that it is difficult to have to put up with trolls. I hope, however, that the inner-tubes are big enough for everyone; maybe we can work together to find a nice bridge for the trolls to live under. It may seem a bit harsh, but if we fed them a few goats now and again, maybe they will feel better about themselves and move on to greener pastures.
3. If we can keep the trolls from offending us, then cyber-area can benefit from the diversity. I saw a documentary once where even an Ogre - I know they are different from trolls, but they share some common disagreeable characteristics - befriended a donkey, and they seemed to have a genuinely witty banter and joie de vivre. I read in the newspaper that the Ogre recently even married; so there is some possibility we can live together.
yeah, I guess it kinda works.
Pretty sure DARPA has that prize sown up. The robots will look like cheerleaders by comparison.
I see where you are going, and its dangerous territory.
Try to follow along:
1. Windows is the most secure OS ever.
2. Because it has a 90+% of the market, it attracts 100% of malware.
3. If even 1% of those malware writers targeted {other os} the world would be awash in {other os} viruses.
4. It is a good thing Windows is there to attract all this malfeasance.
So, we clear? Now, don't bother with any more pesky thinking and there won't be any problems.
I've never asked anything of you; please try to find something even more 'asshattish' than this and bit by bit the world becomes a better place....
I know you have it in you.
is there anything it can't do.
Computers can solve simple problems immediately. Difficult problems take a bit longer. If we could simplify difficult problems, computers could solve them immediately. One type of difficult problem which has a possibility to be simplified is the NP type.
The possibility is so small that he may be better to donate to a humanitarian cause. The humanitarian cause may help someone survive that can answer this question. Even if they can't, he at least helped them survive.
andrea noted that the interface was: .... nice to watch but utterly useless.
which inspired maird to assert:
There is the proof....
You see, maird was saying that the demonstration of something pretty but useless stands as proof that its in the new Windows. The implication is that Windows releases have been dominated by attractive, but worthless items.
By responding to andreas comment with this statement, maird successfully introduced a discontinuity, which the reader may perceive as a delightful surprise, sometimes reacting with laughter. In the traditional world, where this discourse may have occurred around a fire, Mairds companions may have slapped him affectionately on the back, making cooing sounds about wittiness and "bons mots". In this disconnected world "+5 funny" is the depressing equivalent.
Some interpret the delightful surprise as a confusing consternation; often spurning an irrepressible desire to resolve the ambiguity. While this activity in itself is also quite funny, it is more the sad kind of funny.