While that may be true, I'm against protecting people from their own stupidity. Again, it should be:
User: I want to cancel this. AOL: But it looks like you use it a lot. User: I still want to cancel. AOL: Are you absolutely sure? User: Yes. AOL: Ok, done.
I mean, if someone doesn't know what they're doing, and they're stupid, ignorant, or both, they'll get pissed off either way. You may as well give them what they want. They might be more willing to listen to an explanation after they realize they screwed up.
And no, the cheap oil is more apt because it's an oil they carry (or that's what I intended anyway) and a service they offer. Removing the oil from a car and leaving it has liability concerns.
The analogy isn't perfect, but it's meant to show that whether or not the consumer is requesting something that's not in their best interest, but it's something you normally do offer, be it cancelling a service, or offering a lower quality product, then do it.
I find it refreshing when someone takes up the unpopular side of an arguement, and presents an interesting and unique point of view. Instead, it seems you've just ignored the basic rights of consumers to get what they pay for, and to cancel service at any time. If I drive into a mechanic's garage, and tell them to put their crappiest oil into my car, then they should damn well put in the crap oil. They can recommend I not do it, and say, "Are you sure? Is that your final answer?", or whatever, but if I get obviously upset after being quite polite for several minutes, they screwed up.
As for why people are uncomfortable talking to sales people, it's because that's part of how sales people are often trained. They make people uncomfortable, and use that to get sales. Here's an idea, if I want to buy something, I'll call them. Not to mention, this guy's not calling to buy something. He's done with it. He shouldn't need to talk to a sales rep, who's going to try to "sell" him on staying.
What's worse, where I live there seems to be an emerging policy with any service I pay for, that I need to give 30 days notice before the date I want service to stop. I can only assume that there's some law that was just passed that allows this, because I would think it to be legally dubious without specific exception.
The point is, this isn't about people's intolerance of sales people, this is about consumer rights. When someone wants to cancel a service, it should be cancelled. Period. And there's no way you can claim this guy didn't start out polite. He said "Please cancel the account" like 15 times before raising his voice, and never once cursed, or got personal.
Developers aren't the problem. An OSS project has more than just developers, there are people who test for bugs etc. and there are people who document stuff. Yes, the time is donated, but here's a little secret; if you don't make it easy to use your product, people won't.
There are LOTS of non technical people. They will NEVER be technical people. They simply don't think in those terms. It doesn't mean they're stupid, but there are certain tech concepts that they just can't wrap their heads around, the same way I can't wrap my head around income taxes. And there's only about 100 times more non technical users than technical ones. The documentation, especially for free software, is often quite terse, and requires someone to fill in the gaps. Sometimes, it's too verbose, and you need someone to cut through to the meat. Either way, a person should ALWAYS be more helpful than a manual.
Now, the real problem, is in support forums. It's people who know how to use/configure the software who answer questions from those who don't. Everyone who just says "RTFM" is adding noise to the signal, and providing a bad experience to the user in question, who may at this point simply give up.
The opinion that "Linux snobs" usually have is "fine don't use it". The problem is that the response is almost always, "OK, fine.". This is why there aren't more Linux users on the desktop.
Oh, and yes TIVO WILL walk people through recording a show, just like T-Mobile will walk people through turning their phone on and off, etc. etc. Help desks "Help" no matter how stupid the question seems. They might be getting paid, but if free software wants to compete with pay software, it's got to compete with the pay support too.
In many cases (depending on the experience level of the user in question) that is still insufficient, and slightly arrogant. When people are as friendly or less friendly than online documentation, there's a problem. What if you aren't familiar with man pages? What if you somehow didn't get them installed? There are lots of reasons why an experienced user should either just answer the question, or not respond.
Think of it like this; In order for free software to bridge the gap between where it is now, and commercial software, it has to reach the same usability as commercial software, and that means reaching a similar level of support as well. If you ever ask Micro$oft for support, they don't just refer you to a Knowledge base article, they give you step by step instructions.
The idea that "free software is as good or better than commercial software" needs to be accompanied by the notion that "free support can be as good as commercial support". Right now, that's far from true in most cases.
Anyone remember when you could submit virus definitions to McAfee and they were immediately added to the next definition file download? Then someone used that to distribute a virus. There's a reason I boycott these guys.
If anyone remembers, or has a link to the incident I'm thinking of, please post it. The details are a bit fuzzy in my mind, so corrections are welcome too.
And, I'm not usually one to be this petty, but I'll make an exception in this case, to everyone who said McAfee was a good idea, in spite of my recommendations:
Regarding the whole "the limitation is there because of performance" nonsense... What happens if you run Skype on an OLD intel CPU? Does it limit you to only 5 calls on a PIII 500? I doubt it, but if anyone has the answer, I'd love to know for sure.
Honestly, Jackson personifies what is wrong with the current state of Hollywood.
Are you sure you don't mean Uwe Boll?
Seriously, Jackson is a hell of a director, and if there were more like him, movies would suck much less. Don't get me wrong, 3 hours is a bit much for Kong. Jackson could stand to "rein it in a little", but that's the harshest criticism I think he deserves.
C'mon now, if you want to dent the messed up market that is online music, you need to do but one thing. Support all (or most) music players. If people who own a Creative player, AND people who own an iPod can use your service, and other DRM capable players can ride too (I hate DRM, but you can't get a license to distribute most tunes without it), then you will have access to more end users than most services. If you can find a way to do it without DRM, then you just win. But that's another story all together.
This constant shootout between proprietary players, formats, standards, whatever is a waste of time, money, resources, etc. It worked well for Apple because they were one of the first to market with a really good product and easy to use service. This allowed them to go proprietary, as there was no competition. Now, if you want to compete, you need to be compatible, not go proprietary. Give me one good reason why I should switch from the MP3 player I have, which cost say, ~$200, to yours? So you can lock me into yet another proprietary DRM format? Nope, try again, I'll wait... nothing? thought so.
As an aside, creative _should_ have beat apple to the punch, as they had an equivalent player much earlier, but they dropped the ball on service, and have publicly stated as much. Which I think is too bad, as I prefer their players, and find them cheaper. Then again, I have to admit iTunes is pretty slick.
Anyway, point is, if/when a company with a clue gets a compatible with everything service and software, they'll kick some serious ass in the music industry instead of fighting over scraps.
C'mon, just put them all in there. If I can emulate it on my PC, they can make it work on the revolution. Unless the game REALLY sucked, there's no reason to omit anything.
What a stupid article, why did it make the cut?
on
No Time Travel, Sorry
·
· Score: 1
Seriously, this article was on digg about a month ago, and everyone tore it, and the author, a few extra orifaces. Now it makes slashdot, and history repeats itself... not to mention the fact that using grade 10 physics equations to "prove" time is immutable, and simultaneously calling every great physicist of our time a crackpot, is a combination of stupidity, and audacity, the likes of which I have never seen.
I want to downmod the entire story. Who's with me?
My file server recently kicked the bucket. The good news, I had a mirrored array. The bad news, it was the raid card that died. (Thank you promise!) So My ext2 partitions got thouroughly gnarfled. Needless to say, I didn't get 100% recovery, but I did get most of the important stuff back.
That having been said, a decent RAID card and a motherboard with RAID onboard are about the same price. Now a chip and other hardware for that board will cost more, but you can still get a really good RAID-5 system for ~ $500, excluding hard drives (my preference is the A8N-SLI Premium). Add to that a few hard drives (any size you like, I'd go with 300Gigs or bigger) and maybe some swap kits for easy maintainence, and you're good. The swap kits usually have the benefit of fans, but make sure you don't go cheap, otherwise the fans are basically for show (not to mention LOUD!)
It's more like, if they can get HERE, they're way ahead of us. It would take very advanced tech to cover interstellar distances in any reasonable time.
And if they've only just discovered electricity, we won't be able to detect them anyway.
I'm glad there are other people as upset about this descision as me, but I can't believe how many other people on slashdot jump all over this "everything must be open source, otherwise it sucks/is evil/whatever" crap. I don't want to start a flame war or anything, but I'd love for someone to explain to me why "open source is the only way to go for all software". Not a rant, not a list of crap M$ has done, just a concise paragraph outlining exactly why "software MUST be open source". 'cause frankly, I just don't see it. I think OSS is great in certain areas, but I really don't see why it has to be the rule.
Essentially, there's a silly rule that your name cannot begin with a title. i.e. a rank, like captain, commander, sargent, leutenant, etc, or other prefixes like lord, baron, king, etc. It makes sense if you use something that exists in the game (I don't play WoW, so I don't have any examples), but if it's something outside that, I don't see why anyone should care. That having been said, if you put Commander, Cmdr, or any other abbreviated version in your name, someone will (or rather, can) take your name away if they feel like it, and there's nothing you can do about it.
I find it disturbing how many people just say, "who cares", "shut up", "this isn't the right place for this", "stop whinning/bellyaching" etc.
First, stop whinning about Rob whinning. It's hyppocrittical and innaccurate. If you want to take issue with a point of view in the article, fine, but the one line bashing is immature, and a waste of time. You're not contributing anything, you're just flaming.
Second, this article nicely falls into the "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" category. I'm a nerd, this matters to me, so it's fine. If it doesn't matter to you, move along. There are planty of articles that don't interest me here, so I don't read them.
Third, it's an opinion piece, which I think is admerably objective. It might be a little preachy, and yes, even a little whinney, but it's heart felt. Why should that be a bad thing. There's no "call to arms to take down Blizzard", there's only a feeling of unfairness, with a realization that Slashdot has the potential for the same abuse and missgivings. There's a moral, or a lesson if you will.
Finally, this is Rob's place! HIS creation, brainchild, work, hobby, etc! Why would he not have a right to throw in something slightly personal now and then? Yes Slashdot would be nothing without the community, but the reverse is also true. And it's not like Rob writes these articles every day. So even if this were the fluff piece some of you seem to think it is, I think it's ok if he writes one every couple years.
The main point of the article, is that people with the power/ability to affect people they'll never see, should think before they act, and be accountable for said actions, and that Rob has a new appreciation for what this means in regards to him. And as a side note, he's upset he lost his name in WoW. Perhapse those of you who were so quick to object to the article, without stating anything meaningful, should take that thought to heart and put more thought into your posts from now on.
Please don't presume to speak for me, or the other readers. You chose to read the article, go be mad at yourself. It's not like he's complaining about the length of the lines at the local gas station, and it's not like he writes six opinion pieces a week about random BS.
If you pay attention, you'll note that there's a theme running through the article, and a point at the end, which have nothing to do with Rob's misfortune. The article is about accountability, balance in online games/communities, and putting serious thought into decisions that affect people you'll never actually see. Perhapse the article should have ended with, "Y'see, I learned something today...". But I thought it was clear enough.
Wasn't that the point of the article? I mean yes, there was some preachyness, but the "moral(s)" appeared to be that there needs to be accountability for people who make these descisions, and that these descisions shouldn't be handed out lightly, or without consideration.
"And if nothing less, it will make me take changes in Slashdot a little more seriously next time."
The most common response thus far is that the PDA 'interface' is lacking. I have to agree for the most part, but this is only one of the limiting factors.
I've owned a metric crapload of electronic gadgets, from the dollar store electronic organizers to wi-fi enabled PDAs, cell phones for the last 10 years (I change my phone about twice a year, I'm a sucker for features), and mp3 players from when 128 megs was a lot, to present day. I think I have a pretty good idea of the success and failings in many of these portable devices.
In regards to interface, you can only fit so much into a device that small anyway (as far as means of input). Voice input sucks, dinky keyboards suck, and handwriting input takes up a fair bit of screen realestate, and usually sucks. Having a method of input is neccessary to a point, but I think it's a 'last resort' sort of thing.
The only thing the device itself needs to be really good at is output. If I need to see an appointment, or listen to music, or recal a memo, etc. THAT needs to be easily accessable. You want to surf the web? Type documents? Watch videos? Get a laptop, tablet, or OQO.
This brings me to the problem of price. Ever look at the cost of these devices? You can buy a laptop or a desktop computer for the cost of these devices. Both are better at EVERYTHING, accept being portable. So you buy a $50 MP3 player, or whatever, and a pad of paper, and use some remote terminal access for emergencies when you forget an important document at home or whatever.
I think 'useful general purpose portable devices' (UGPPDs?) should concentrate on being useful when you're carrying them around, but interface with something better when you're at home/work/wherever with access to a better terminal. Don't tell me about 'active sync' or whatever, it still needs a fair bit of work, and the 'getting what I want back out' part is still weak. When I want to carry info around with me, I print it out, fold it up, and put it in my pocket, because it's easier for me. And I'm a power user! Think of how non-technical people must feel.
I just got what I think will be my last cell phone for some time. It fits the bill for everything I need, and most of what I have discussed. The nokia 6230 ( I do not work for nokia, or any phone company at all ). It has a good calendar/scheduler with alarms etc. It synchronizes with outlook (yeah, microsoft product, I need to use it, get over it), via bluetooth whenever I go near my computer. The input is there if I need it, but again, is only so good (although I still need to look into the nokia pen thing, which might be really cool, then again, see my notes about handwriting recognition sucking). The output is great. It allows me to get to whatever I want quickly and easily. It also plays Mp3s and takes VGA pictures quite handily. The price is good with a cell contract, or if you get it used. It has adequately replaced my PDA, MP3 player, and... er... old cell phone. Considering I never carry my camera with me I guess that's covered too. And the best part? It looks like a phone! You know what I'm talking about. It just looks goofy to hold your PDA to your ear.
I think PDAs in their current incarnation are basically useless. I think a cellphone with a large and/or upgradable quantity of storage, a reasonable ability to access vital data, and a wireless docking interface of some sort that you can use with public and/or private interface terminals, is the ultimate evolution of ubiquitous data availability.
The firestore seems to have a lot going for it, but it has a ~90 minute battery life. If this is a concern, a notebook with 2 battery bays, plus extra batteries you can hot swap, might be the best way to solve your problem. If portability is a big problem, then the firestore with an extension cord, or some other power extention device would seem best. But it sounds like continuous run time is your greatest concern.
You could always just connect a firestore to a cart with a bunch of daisy chained UPSes.;)
The tin foil would get quite hot, and probably cause worse burns, anthough it would probaly also prevent any side effects that would be caused later on. Then again, tin foil over an insulating layer could do the trick.
Of course, if it really only penetrates 1/64th of an inch of skin, I assume simply being constantly hosed down with water would prevent the weapon from being effective, as the water should absorb the microwaves before they get to the skin.
I believe there are also ways of reflecting microwaves, but I might be remembering something else, or just watching too much TV...
Um... lemme see here... the weapon's being DEPLOYED after being in development for ~ 10 years, contingent on 6 - 8 *months* of testing, while life saving medications take some 25+ years of TESTING after they've been developed before they're released to the public?
Well I guess the worlds over populated anyway...:-/
Slashdot Mirror
While that may be true, I'm against protecting people from their own stupidity. Again, it should be:
User: I want to cancel this.
AOL: But it looks like you use it a lot.
User: I still want to cancel.
AOL: Are you absolutely sure?
User: Yes.
AOL: Ok, done.
I mean, if someone doesn't know what they're doing, and they're stupid, ignorant, or both, they'll get pissed off either way. You may as well give them what they want. They might be more willing to listen to an explanation after they realize they screwed up.
And no, the cheap oil is more apt because it's an oil they carry (or that's what I intended anyway) and a service they offer. Removing the oil from a car and leaving it has liability concerns.
The analogy isn't perfect, but it's meant to show that whether or not the consumer is requesting something that's not in their best interest, but it's something you normally do offer, be it cancelling a service, or offering a lower quality product, then do it.
I find it refreshing when someone takes up the unpopular side of an arguement, and presents an interesting and unique point of view. Instead, it seems you've just ignored the basic rights of consumers to get what they pay for, and to cancel service at any time. If I drive into a mechanic's garage, and tell them to put their crappiest oil into my car, then they should damn well put in the crap oil. They can recommend I not do it, and say, "Are you sure? Is that your final answer?", or whatever, but if I get obviously upset after being quite polite for several minutes, they screwed up.
As for why people are uncomfortable talking to sales people, it's because that's part of how sales people are often trained. They make people uncomfortable, and use that to get sales. Here's an idea, if I want to buy something, I'll call them. Not to mention, this guy's not calling to buy something. He's done with it. He shouldn't need to talk to a sales rep, who's going to try to "sell" him on staying.
What's worse, where I live there seems to be an emerging policy with any service I pay for, that I need to give 30 days notice before the date I want service to stop. I can only assume that there's some law that was just passed that allows this, because I would think it to be legally dubious without specific exception.
The point is, this isn't about people's intolerance of sales people, this is about consumer rights. When someone wants to cancel a service, it should be cancelled. Period. And there's no way you can claim this guy didn't start out polite. He said "Please cancel the account" like 15 times before raising his voice, and never once cursed, or got personal.
I for one welcome our new exploding laptop masters!
You forgot:
4. Imagine a beowulf cluster of these.
Developers aren't the problem. An OSS project has more than just developers, there are people who test for bugs etc. and there are people who document stuff. Yes, the time is donated, but here's a little secret; if you don't make it easy to use your product, people won't.
There are LOTS of non technical people. They will NEVER be technical people. They simply don't think in those terms. It doesn't mean they're stupid, but there are certain tech concepts that they just can't wrap their heads around, the same way I can't wrap my head around income taxes. And there's only about 100 times more non technical users than technical ones. The documentation, especially for free software, is often quite terse, and requires someone to fill in the gaps. Sometimes, it's too verbose, and you need someone to cut through to the meat. Either way, a person should ALWAYS be more helpful than a manual.
Now, the real problem, is in support forums. It's people who know how to use/configure the software who answer questions from those who don't. Everyone who just says "RTFM" is adding noise to the signal, and providing a bad experience to the user in question, who may at this point simply give up.
The opinion that "Linux snobs" usually have is "fine don't use it". The problem is that the response is almost always, "OK, fine.". This is why there aren't more Linux users on the desktop.
Oh, and yes TIVO WILL walk people through recording a show, just like T-Mobile will walk people through turning their phone on and off, etc. etc. Help desks "Help" no matter how stupid the question seems. They might be getting paid, but if free software wants to compete with pay software, it's got to compete with the pay support too.
In many cases (depending on the experience level of the user in question) that is still insufficient, and slightly arrogant. When people are as friendly or less friendly than online documentation, there's a problem. What if you aren't familiar with man pages? What if you somehow didn't get them installed? There are lots of reasons why an experienced user should either just answer the question, or not respond.
Think of it like this; In order for free software to bridge the gap between where it is now, and commercial software, it has to reach the same usability as commercial software, and that means reaching a similar level of support as well. If you ever ask Micro$oft for support, they don't just refer you to a Knowledge base article, they give you step by step instructions.
The idea that "free software is as good or better than commercial software" needs to be accompanied by the notion that "free support can be as good as commercial support". Right now, that's far from true in most cases.
Will Wheaton is too old to play the part now! ;)
Anyone remember when you could submit virus definitions to McAfee and they were immediately added to the next definition file download? Then someone used that to distribute a virus. There's a reason I boycott these guys.
If anyone remembers, or has a link to the incident I'm thinking of, please post it. The details are a bit fuzzy in my mind, so corrections are welcome too.
And, I'm not usually one to be this petty, but I'll make an exception in this case, to everyone who said McAfee was a good idea, in spite of my recommendations:
I TOLD YOU SO!!!
Ok, I feel better now.
Regarding the whole "the limitation is there because of performance" nonsense... What happens if you run Skype on an OLD intel CPU? Does it limit you to only 5 calls on a PIII 500? I doubt it, but if anyone has the answer, I'd love to know for sure.
I don't care if I EVER see the movie.
So... you haven't seen the movie you're bashing?
Honestly, Jackson personifies what is wrong with the current state of Hollywood.
Are you sure you don't mean Uwe Boll?
Seriously, Jackson is a hell of a director, and if there were more like him, movies would suck much less. Don't get me wrong, 3 hours is a bit much for Kong. Jackson could stand to "rein it in a little", but that's the harshest criticism I think he deserves.
Think of the children! ... er, I mean, consumers.
C'mon now, if you want to dent the messed up market that is online music, you need to do but one thing. Support all (or most) music players. If people who own a Creative player, AND people who own an iPod can use your service, and other DRM capable players can ride too (I hate DRM, but you can't get a license to distribute most tunes without it), then you will have access to more end users than most services. If you can find a way to do it without DRM, then you just win. But that's another story all together.
This constant shootout between proprietary players, formats, standards, whatever is a waste of time, money, resources, etc. It worked well for Apple because they were one of the first to market with a really good product and easy to use service. This allowed them to go proprietary, as there was no competition. Now, if you want to compete, you need to be compatible, not go proprietary. Give me one good reason why I should switch from the MP3 player I have, which cost say, ~$200, to yours? So you can lock me into yet another proprietary DRM format? Nope, try again, I'll wait... nothing? thought so.
As an aside, creative _should_ have beat apple to the punch, as they had an equivalent player much earlier, but they dropped the ball on service, and have publicly stated as much. Which I think is too bad, as I prefer their players, and find them cheaper. Then again, I have to admit iTunes is pretty slick.
Anyway, point is, if/when a company with a clue gets a compatible with everything service and software, they'll kick some serious ass in the music industry instead of fighting over scraps.
C'mon, just put them all in there. If I can emulate it on my PC, they can make it work on the revolution. Unless the game REALLY sucked, there's no reason to omit anything.
Seriously, this article was on digg about a month ago, and everyone tore it, and the author, a few extra orifaces. Now it makes slashdot, and history repeats itself... not to mention the fact that using grade 10 physics equations to "prove" time is immutable, and simultaneously calling every great physicist of our time a crackpot, is a combination of stupidity, and audacity, the likes of which I have never seen.
I want to downmod the entire story. Who's with me?
My file server recently kicked the bucket. The good news, I had a mirrored array. The bad news, it was the raid card that died. (Thank you promise!) So My ext2 partitions got thouroughly gnarfled. Needless to say, I didn't get 100% recovery, but I did get most of the important stuff back.
That having been said, a decent RAID card and a motherboard with RAID onboard are about the same price. Now a chip and other hardware for that board will cost more, but you can still get a really good RAID-5 system for ~ $500, excluding hard drives (my preference is the A8N-SLI Premium). Add to that a few hard drives (any size you like, I'd go with 300Gigs or bigger) and maybe some swap kits for easy maintainence, and you're good. The swap kits usually have the benefit of fans, but make sure you don't go cheap, otherwise the fans are basically for show (not to mention LOUD!)
It's more like, if they can get HERE, they're way ahead of us. It would take very advanced tech to cover interstellar distances in any reasonable time.
And if they've only just discovered electricity, we won't be able to detect them anyway.
C'mon, no one's suggested blowing up the mountain as an alternative yet? This is slashdot right? I'm so disillusioned... ;)
I'm glad there are other people as upset about this descision as me, but I can't believe how many other people on slashdot jump all over this "everything must be open source, otherwise it sucks/is evil/whatever" crap. I don't want to start a flame war or anything, but I'd love for someone to explain to me why "open source is the only way to go for all software". Not a rant, not a list of crap M$ has done, just a concise paragraph outlining exactly why "software MUST be open source". 'cause frankly, I just don't see it. I think OSS is great in certain areas, but I really don't see why it has to be the rule.
Essentially, there's a silly rule that your name cannot begin with a title. i.e. a rank, like captain, commander, sargent, leutenant, etc, or other prefixes like lord, baron, king, etc. It makes sense if you use something that exists in the game (I don't play WoW, so I don't have any examples), but if it's something outside that, I don't see why anyone should care. That having been said, if you put Commander, Cmdr, or any other abbreviated version in your name, someone will (or rather, can) take your name away if they feel like it, and there's nothing you can do about it.
I find it disturbing how many people just say, "who cares", "shut up", "this isn't the right place for this", "stop whinning/bellyaching" etc.
First, stop whinning about Rob whinning. It's hyppocrittical and innaccurate. If you want to take issue with a point of view in the article, fine, but the one line bashing is immature, and a waste of time. You're not contributing anything, you're just flaming.
Second, this article nicely falls into the "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" category. I'm a nerd, this matters to me, so it's fine. If it doesn't matter to you, move along. There are planty of articles that don't interest me here, so I don't read them.
Third, it's an opinion piece, which I think is admerably objective. It might be a little preachy, and yes, even a little whinney, but it's heart felt. Why should that be a bad thing. There's no "call to arms to take down Blizzard", there's only a feeling of unfairness, with a realization that Slashdot has the potential for the same abuse and missgivings. There's a moral, or a lesson if you will.
Finally, this is Rob's place! HIS creation, brainchild, work, hobby, etc! Why would he not have a right to throw in something slightly personal now and then? Yes Slashdot would be nothing without the community, but the reverse is also true. And it's not like Rob writes these articles every day. So even if this were the fluff piece some of you seem to think it is, I think it's ok if he writes one every couple years.
The main point of the article, is that people with the power/ability to affect people they'll never see, should think before they act, and be accountable for said actions, and that Rob has a new appreciation for what this means in regards to him. And as a side note, he's upset he lost his name in WoW. Perhapse those of you who were so quick to object to the article, without stating anything meaningful, should take that thought to heart and put more thought into your posts from now on.
Please don't presume to speak for me, or the other readers. You chose to read the article, go be mad at yourself. It's not like he's complaining about the length of the lines at the local gas station, and it's not like he writes six opinion pieces a week about random BS.
If you pay attention, you'll note that there's a theme running through the article, and a point at the end, which have nothing to do with Rob's misfortune. The article is about accountability, balance in online games/communities, and putting serious thought into decisions that affect people you'll never actually see. Perhapse the article should have ended with, "Y'see, I learned something today...". But I thought it was clear enough.
Wasn't that the point of the article? I mean yes, there was some preachyness, but the "moral(s)" appeared to be that there needs to be accountability for people who make these descisions, and that these descisions shouldn't be handed out lightly, or without consideration.
"And if nothing less, it will make me take changes in Slashdot a little more seriously next time."
The most common response thus far is that the PDA 'interface' is lacking. I have to agree for the most part, but this is only one of the limiting factors.
I've owned a metric crapload of electronic gadgets, from the dollar store electronic organizers to wi-fi enabled PDAs, cell phones for the last 10 years (I change my phone about twice a year, I'm a sucker for features), and mp3 players from when 128 megs was a lot, to present day. I think I have a pretty good idea of the success and failings in many of these portable devices.
In regards to interface, you can only fit so much into a device that small anyway (as far as means of input). Voice input sucks, dinky keyboards suck, and handwriting input takes up a fair bit of screen realestate, and usually sucks. Having a method of input is neccessary to a point, but I think it's a 'last resort' sort of thing.
The only thing the device itself needs to be really good at is output. If I need to see an appointment, or listen to music, or recal a memo, etc. THAT needs to be easily accessable. You want to surf the web? Type documents? Watch videos? Get a laptop, tablet, or OQO.
This brings me to the problem of price. Ever look at the cost of these devices? You can buy a laptop or a desktop computer for the cost of these devices. Both are better at EVERYTHING, accept being portable. So you buy a $50 MP3 player, or whatever, and a pad of paper, and use some remote terminal access for emergencies when you forget an important document at home or whatever.
I think 'useful general purpose portable devices' (UGPPDs?) should concentrate on being useful when you're carrying them around, but interface with something better when you're at home/work/wherever with access to a better terminal. Don't tell me about 'active sync' or whatever, it still needs a fair bit of work, and the 'getting what I want back out' part is still weak. When I want to carry info around with me, I print it out, fold it up, and put it in my pocket, because it's easier for me. And I'm a power user! Think of how non-technical people must feel.
I just got what I think will be my last cell phone for some time. It fits the bill for everything I need, and most of what I have discussed. The nokia 6230 ( I do not work for nokia, or any phone company at all ). It has a good calendar/scheduler with alarms etc. It synchronizes with outlook (yeah, microsoft product, I need to use it, get over it), via bluetooth whenever I go near my computer. The input is there if I need it, but again, is only so good (although I still need to look into the nokia pen thing, which might be really cool, then again, see my notes about handwriting recognition sucking). The output is great. It allows me to get to whatever I want quickly and easily. It also plays Mp3s and takes VGA pictures quite handily. The price is good with a cell contract, or if you get it used. It has adequately replaced my PDA, MP3 player, and... er... old cell phone. Considering I never carry my camera with me I guess that's covered too. And the best part? It looks like a phone! You know what I'm talking about. It just looks goofy to hold your PDA to your ear.
I think PDAs in their current incarnation are basically useless. I think a cellphone with a large and/or upgradable quantity of storage, a reasonable ability to access vital data, and a wireless docking interface of some sort that you can use with public and/or private interface terminals, is the ultimate evolution of ubiquitous data availability.
The firestore seems to have a lot going for it, but it has a ~90 minute battery life. If this is a concern, a notebook with 2 battery bays, plus extra batteries you can hot swap, might be the best way to solve your problem. If portability is a big problem, then the firestore with an extension cord, or some other power extention device would seem best. But it sounds like continuous run time is your greatest concern.
;)
You could always just connect a firestore to a cart with a bunch of daisy chained UPSes.
The tin foil would get quite hot, and probably cause worse burns, anthough it would probaly also prevent any side effects that would be caused later on. Then again, tin foil over an insulating layer could do the trick.
Of course, if it really only penetrates 1/64th of an inch of skin, I assume simply being constantly hosed down with water would prevent the weapon from being effective, as the water should absorb the microwaves before they get to the skin.
I believe there are also ways of reflecting microwaves, but I might be remembering something else, or just watching too much TV...
Um... lemme see here... the weapon's being DEPLOYED after being in development for ~ 10 years, contingent on 6 - 8 *months* of testing, while life saving medications take some 25+ years of TESTING after they've been developed before they're released to the public?
:-/
Well I guess the worlds over populated anyway...