We're talking a laptop replacement here. Once you start adding apps (OpenOffice, a real web browser, the LaTeX toolchain, etc.), there isn't a whole lot left over for your multimedia library, let alone your favorite Linux distribution.
I can understand keeping the Linux implementation distinct from the phone. Depending on the distribution, it could eat up quite a bit of the phone's available memory to have full fledged LInux on it.
But what I can't really get is having a crippled Linux distribution on the various docks. No installing LaTeX and CTAN for you!
Something like the Atrix is close to the perfect machine for me.
But you can't install regular Linux apps. Someday this might work but until such time as the TeX/LaTeX toolchain gets ported, I'll be waiting.
Well, perhaps the other possibility would be for one of the online LaTeX providers to allow my customized stylesheets and all the modules from CTAN that I regularly use.
Apple made USB its standard mouse/keyboard bus before Windows even properly supported USB. (All Macs were shipping with USB in 1998 while WIndows 98 was the first Windows to give USB first class status.) It took until the early to mid 2000s for IBM compatibles to drop the ps/2 ports for mice and keyboards.
I thought that was THE metaphor for deleting files, dragging them to the shredder.
Plus, my wife edited a.wav of a chainsaw buzzing followed by a scream and associated it with the action of shredding a file. That added to the effect, you shred a file, hear it get cut up and scream its last. The message it re-inforced was FILE DONE GONE!
If fuel can be made from petroleum substitutes, this frees up petroleum for petro-chemicals, plastics, fertilizers, etc. I'd be slightly surprised, but only slightly, if US domestic production of oil couldn't satisfy all non-fuel needs in the US. And if can't, then there are all oil exporting non-OPEC nations like Canada, Great Britain, Russia, China, Mexico, Brazil, etc.
Locally, I can get a prepaid smart phone plan for $50 per month with unlimited voice and data.
Of course, that is a good deal more pricy than some of the pre-paid voice only plans. Before I went post-paid, I was paying T*Mobile $100 annually for a bucket of 1000 minutes. I could have stretched the minutes out longer than a year but you have to buy a new prepaid card every 12 months to keep your minutes.
The phones themselves start in the $50 to $100 range. Even AT&T is selling the iPhone 3gs for $50 a pop.
Which, admittedly, is more expensive than the $10 to $20 it takes to buy a basic phone that does no more than make phone calls. On the other hand, you can find subsidized phones in both cases where signing up for a 2 year contract makes the price of the phone "free."
What percentage of the mobile market were smart phones two years ago?
Five years ago?
To have so many more people buying smart phones in such a relativley short amount of time is pretty amazing. What is even more amazing is that the current crop of smart phones has people using them like smart phones. Five years ago, I'd wager half the people that had "smart phones" didn't use the "smart" features but used them as a good old fashioned mobile phone and nothing more. (Crackberry users excepted.) But with the advent of iPhone and Androids, smart phone users downloading and using various apps has become ubiquitous behavior among smart phone users.
That's a paradigm shift happening right in front of our eyes.
In these days of a corporatized internet, it's endearing to know that one person with a bone to pick can still influence vast swaths of the public consumption of the internet.
(Or at least you didn't supply a principle stating why it was more moral for there to be help desk jobs in the US than offshore.)
What you supplied was an ecomonic argument. And one that's wrong, or at least short-sighted.
There is, in fact, a race to the bottom going on. Nations are presently fighting against other nations to supply the same products and services at lower cost. First, it was outsourcing to India and the Philipines. But they got expensive. So then eastern Europe, Indonesia and China started getting the jobs. Now those places are getting expensive. Over time, the low cost options are getting more and more expensive.
So this trend happens to have two implications.
First, it means that more and more countries have more and more discretionary income to purchase products that they would not have purchased previously. This means that globally there are more jobs because demand for various items is increasing. Families that were basically engaged in subsistance labor are now buying "luxuries." This increases the number of jobs total.
Second, eventually, the entire world will reach some sort of equilibrium. Even when the economy is this or that nation tanks, their wages don't get reset to the level of the Cambodias and Guatamalas of the world.
Neither so Sarahs with any last name other than Palin. In fact even other Sarah Palins don't have to worry unless they intend to market themselves in the same industry niche as Sarah Palin. If Palin is awarded a trademark on her name, someone with the given name Sarah Palin, for example, could market him or herself as a comedian and not have to worry at all. What it might do is give Palin grounds to sue Hustler if Hustler makes a sequel to Nailin' Paylin and clearly references the persona as described by the trademark.
His trademark, of course, was filed while he was still purely an entertainer. Nevertheless in came in useful when he ran for governor and his opponent sent put a mailer with Jesse's likeness in his full blown wrestling regalia repleat with feathered roach clips and a boa. Ventura was able to sue to stop the mailing.
More interesting is whether such options would be viable where there was a larger conflation between political and entertainer personas. Unlike Ventura's situation there is no obvious bright line between Palin's persona as a politician and as an entertainer.
If Palin does get a trademark, I would hope that the courts would reject any trademark infingement case over references to Palin with regards to her political persona.
It seems to me that only those who abstain from meat for a particular type of religious and health reasons concerning the nature of animal flesh would have any desire to avoid meat grown in a lab. That's probably a very small subset of vegetarians.
Roads to built it? Not so much. The support towers can be dropped in by helicopter. Only the wire needs to get put in the whole way and, well, you don't need a road for that.
Perpetual motion? Hardly. RTFA. One example is the gold mine that runs the gold downhill to the refinery. Not only do they not need additional power to run the sky line, they get free electricity.
Many mountain ranges have valleys between peaks that are at risk for flooding.
(a) less expensive to build than roads or rail (b) can be built where roads or rail are problematic (steep vertical ascents/descents) (c) can be partially (or entirely) powered by gravity (d) can be operated during heavy snows and floods
Trains probably have an advantage over a long distance, especially over flat terrain. I would think that trains would also have a speed advantage and be somewhat more flexible.
The issue of who wants to friend you and why is not addressed by this application. What this application does is to provide information that is publicly available. That information consists of two elements: changes to your friends list and whether a friend request is still outstanding. Both of these pieces of information are available to the observant face book user. The app just makes it easier to notice.
Correlating these pieces of information to an explanation of why they happened isn't something the app actually does. One can conjecture that a post of "politican X is worse than Hitler" followed by friend Y defriending you means that Y likes politician X. But that is conjecture. The timing could have been coincidental.
Moreover, it could be that someone does want to friend you but thinks that for whatever reason it might not be expedient. After all, a relationship on Facebook is really only a name on an access control list. It doesn't really indicate whether one has a friendly relationship in real life. As an example, a professor may be good friends with undergraduate students but may feel that being "friends" on Facebook is inappropriate until such time as those students graduate.
So I don't see an "evil" here. Rather, I just see one more tool that can be used correctly or incorrectly, appropriately or inappropriately, for good or for evil.
For example, a spouse in the middle of a divorce may "friend" the lover of the other spouse in order to collect information helpful in the divorce proceedings.
... try to compete with Microsoft on the low end when their profit margin is so much higher on the high end multi-processor machines?
As the various app stores continue to explode with apps, Intel will feel increasing pressure on ots high end. If they don't play defense on the low end, eventually they'll find their high end niche turning into a smaller and smaller slice of pie.
Heck, my iPad has more processing power than my fist desktop computer and, arguably, more processing power than the average desktop user needs. Five years down the road, ARM will have enough processing power to be installed in high end wokstations. If Intel doesn't keep x86 a popular choice at the low end, they'll eventually find that ARM is eating their lunch at the mid- range and ultimately at the high end.
Bing's first page of hits consists of 2 different links to LinkedIn, My Facebook profile, entries with people with my name on 123People.com and MyLife.com (both basically white pages from the phone company, two links to my personal blog (one of which is an article), A Zoom Info (business directory) entry for my blog (WTF?), a comment I made on someone else's blog and my profile on that same blog. There is a footer of "images of Lee Malatesta" but none of the images are of me.
Google's first page of hits is my personal blog with 3 sub entries for specific articles on my personal blog, my Facebook profile, the same two LinkedIn links as Bing lists, two comments I wrote on Will Wilkinsen's blog, and my profile on the same blog that Bing found.
Google's hits are far less spammy (no 123People, no pseudo business directories) and far more representative of my online presence. But I guess those results are very much in line with the results of the study by the SEO firm. Bing returns spammier results.
Because you can't effectively compare a binary to source code.
You could compare a binary to another binary compiled from known good source.
But that presumes that the compiler used to compile the known good source doesn't contain the backdoor.
There are other variations of this, such as decompiling the binary and comparing the output to the original source. But that presumes that the decompiler doesn't know about the backdoor.
Slashdot Mirror
We're talking a laptop replacement here. Once you start adding apps (OpenOffice, a real web browser, the LaTeX toolchain, etc.), there isn't a whole lot left over for your multimedia library, let alone your favorite Linux distribution.
For example: http://clsi.scribtex.com/
I can understand keeping the Linux implementation distinct from the phone. Depending on the distribution, it could eat up quite a bit of the phone's available memory to have full fledged LInux on it.
But what I can't really get is having a crippled Linux distribution on the various docks. No installing LaTeX and CTAN for you!
Something like the Atrix is close to the perfect machine for me.
But you can't install regular Linux apps. Someday this might work but until such time as the TeX/LaTeX toolchain gets ported, I'll be waiting.
Well, perhaps the other possibility would be for one of the online LaTeX providers to allow my customized stylesheets and all the modules from CTAN that I regularly use.
Apple made USB its standard mouse/keyboard bus before Windows even properly supported USB. (All Macs were shipping with USB in 1998 while WIndows 98 was the first Windows to give USB first class status.) It took until the early to mid 2000s for IBM compatibles to drop the ps/2 ports for mice and keyboards.
I thought that was THE metaphor for deleting files, dragging them to the shredder.
Plus, my wife edited a .wav of a chainsaw buzzing followed by a scream and associated it with the action of shredding a file. That added to the effect, you shred a file, hear it get cut up and scream its last. The message it re-inforced was FILE DONE GONE!
That sounds pretty reasonable until you realize that it's a smurf-sized wagon.
I think the scene with his grieving widow in front of a tombstone with his name on it suggest that Wash did actually die.
If fuel can be made from petroleum substitutes, this frees up petroleum for petro-chemicals, plastics, fertilizers, etc. I'd be slightly surprised, but only slightly, if US domestic production of oil couldn't satisfy all non-fuel needs in the US. And if can't, then there are all oil exporting non-OPEC nations like Canada, Great Britain, Russia, China, Mexico, Brazil, etc.
If so, keyboards will work natively with it just like they do with the iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch.
I've never thought to try a bluetooth mouse with an iOS device but I suspect that it wouldn't work. The GUI doens't have a mouse pointer.
Locally, I can get a prepaid smart phone plan for $50 per month with unlimited voice and data.
Of course, that is a good deal more pricy than some of the pre-paid voice only plans. Before I went post-paid, I was paying T*Mobile $100 annually for a bucket of 1000 minutes. I could have stretched the minutes out longer than a year but you have to buy a new prepaid card every 12 months to keep your minutes.
The phones themselves start in the $50 to $100 range. Even AT&T is selling the iPhone 3gs for $50 a pop.
Which, admittedly, is more expensive than the $10 to $20 it takes to buy a basic phone that does no more than make phone calls. On the other hand, you can find subsidized phones in both cases where signing up for a 2 year contract makes the price of the phone "free."
They say that like it's a bad thing.
What percentage of the mobile market were smart phones two years ago?
Five years ago?
To have so many more people buying smart phones in such a relativley short amount of time is pretty amazing. What is even more amazing is that the current crop of smart phones has people using them like smart phones. Five years ago, I'd wager half the people that had "smart phones" didn't use the "smart" features but used them as a good old fashioned mobile phone and nothing more. (Crackberry users excepted.) But with the advent of iPhone and Androids, smart phone users downloading and using various apps has become ubiquitous behavior among smart phone users.
That's a paradigm shift happening right in front of our eyes.
.you
Need I say more?
In these days of a corporatized internet, it's endearing to know that one person with a bone to pick can still influence vast swaths of the public consumption of the internet.
Now if only she had managed to get the images on Google Images and had the links going to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edaJP3Lp0Gg
(Or at least you didn't supply a principle stating why it was more moral for there to be help desk jobs in the US than offshore.)
What you supplied was an ecomonic argument. And one that's wrong, or at least short-sighted.
There is, in fact, a race to the bottom going on. Nations are presently fighting against other nations to supply the same products and services at lower cost. First, it was outsourcing to India and the Philipines. But they got expensive. So then eastern Europe, Indonesia and China started getting the jobs. Now those places are getting expensive. Over time, the low cost options are getting more and more expensive.
So this trend happens to have two implications.
First, it means that more and more countries have more and more discretionary income to purchase products that they would not have purchased previously. This means that globally there are more jobs because demand for various items is increasing. Families that were basically engaged in subsistance labor are now buying "luxuries." This increases the number of jobs total.
Second, eventually, the entire world will reach some sort of equilibrium. Even when the economy is this or that nation tanks, their wages don't get reset to the level of the Cambodias and Guatamalas of the world.
Neither so Sarahs with any last name other than Palin. In fact even other Sarah Palins don't have to worry unless they intend to market themselves in the same industry niche as Sarah Palin. If Palin is awarded a trademark on her name, someone with the given name Sarah Palin, for example, could market him or herself as a comedian and not have to worry at all. What it might do is give Palin grounds to sue Hustler if Hustler makes a sequel to Nailin' Paylin and clearly references the persona as described by the trademark.
His trademark, of course, was filed while he was still purely an entertainer. Nevertheless in came in useful when he ran for governor and his opponent sent put a mailer with Jesse's likeness in his full blown wrestling regalia repleat with feathered roach clips and a boa. Ventura was able to sue to stop the mailing.
More interesting is whether such options would be viable where there was a larger conflation between political and entertainer personas. Unlike Ventura's situation there is no obvious bright line between Palin's persona as a politician and as an entertainer.
If Palin does get a trademark, I would hope that the courts would reject any trademark infingement case over references to Palin with regards to her political persona.
In fact, they're offering a cool million bucks for the first company to bring it to market.
It seems to me that only those who abstain from meat for a particular type of religious and health reasons concerning the nature of animal flesh would have any desire to avoid meat grown in a lab. That's probably a very small subset of vegetarians.
Roads to built it? Not so much. The support towers can be dropped in by helicopter. Only the wire needs to get put in the whole way and, well, you don't need a road for that.
Perpetual motion? Hardly. RTFA. One example is the gold mine that runs the gold downhill to the refinery. Not only do they not need additional power to run the sky line, they get free electricity.
Many mountain ranges have valleys between peaks that are at risk for flooding.
(a) less expensive to build than roads or rail
(b) can be built where roads or rail are problematic (steep vertical ascents/descents)
(c) can be partially (or entirely) powered by gravity
(d) can be operated during heavy snows and floods
Trains probably have an advantage over a long distance, especially over flat terrain. I would think that trains would also have a speed advantage and be somewhat more flexible.
The issue of who wants to friend you and why is not addressed by this application. What this application does is to provide information that is publicly available. That information consists of two elements: changes to your friends list and whether a friend request is still outstanding. Both of these pieces of information are available to the observant face book user. The app just makes it easier to notice.
Correlating these pieces of information to an explanation of why they happened isn't something the app actually does. One can conjecture that a post of "politican X is worse than Hitler" followed by friend Y defriending you means that Y likes politician X. But that is conjecture. The timing could have been coincidental.
Moreover, it could be that someone does want to friend you but thinks that for whatever reason it might not be expedient. After all, a relationship on Facebook is really only a name on an access control list. It doesn't really indicate whether one has a friendly relationship in real life. As an example, a professor may be good friends with undergraduate students but may feel that being "friends" on Facebook is inappropriate until such time as those students graduate.
So I don't see an "evil" here. Rather, I just see one more tool that can be used correctly or incorrectly, appropriately or inappropriately, for good or for evil.
For example, a spouse in the middle of a divorce may "friend" the lover of the other spouse in order to collect information helpful in the divorce proceedings.
... try to compete with Microsoft on the low end when their profit margin is so much higher on the high end multi-processor machines?
As the various app stores continue to explode with apps, Intel will feel increasing pressure on ots high end. If they don't play defense on the low end, eventually they'll find their high end niche turning into a smaller and smaller slice of pie.
Heck, my iPad has more processing power than my fist desktop computer and, arguably, more processing power than the average desktop user needs. Five years down the road, ARM will have enough processing power to be installed in high end wokstations. If Intel doesn't keep x86 a popular choice at the low end, they'll eventually find that ARM is eating their lunch at the mid- range and ultimately at the high end.
Bing's first page of hits consists of 2 different links to LinkedIn, My Facebook profile, entries with people with my name on 123People.com and MyLife.com (both basically white pages from the phone company, two links to my personal blog (one of which is an article), A Zoom Info (business directory) entry for my blog (WTF?), a comment I made on someone else's blog and my profile on that same blog. There is a footer of "images of Lee Malatesta" but none of the images are of me.
Google's first page of hits is my personal blog with 3 sub entries for specific articles on my personal blog, my Facebook profile, the same two LinkedIn links as Bing lists, two comments I wrote on Will Wilkinsen's blog, and my profile on the same blog that Bing found.
Google's hits are far less spammy (no 123People, no pseudo business directories) and far more representative of my online presence. But I guess those results are very much in line with the results of the study by the SEO firm. Bing returns spammier results.
Because you can't effectively compare a binary to source code.
You could compare a binary to another binary compiled from known good source.
But that presumes that the compiler used to compile the known good source doesn't contain the backdoor.
There are other variations of this, such as decompiling the binary and comparing the output to the original source. But that presumes that the decompiler doesn't know about the backdoor.
The rabbit hole goes pretty deep on this one.