First, people need to stop comparing this stuff to electroconvulsive shock therapy, in which a current is applied across one or both lobes of the brain as a treatment for severe depression and other problems, and which can produce confusion, nausea, and memory loss.
ECT uses 1 amp at 160-500 volts, whereas this controller uses 0.016 amp at 1.5-4.5 volts (depending on how it's wired, I dunno.) So even if you connected the electrodes to the right spots on your head, you would still not be in the neighborhood of ECT treatment.
Second, and this is more important:
Good god! Has anybody thought of the psychological implications of this? Anyone who's played enough FPS's and other frenetic action games knows that it's not uncommon to have these games infect one's dreams -- you go to bed at 4am after several hours of Q3 deathmatches, and sleep to the din of rockets and shotgun blasts running through your head.
Reinforcing every wrong move with an unpleasant electric shock cannot make this any better. This controller may make for better CS players, but it's inevitably going to produce a few hundred 'twitch' cases as well. Can't be good.
Heh, you might as well assign a hotkey to that line of text...
Also, the short-memory people also forget that the GUI and mouse were sitting around collecting dust. Xerox didn't have a clue what to do with them-- they just paid the researchers who thunk them up.
...even though I intensely dislike Windows and distrust Microsoft, I don't think it's fair to blame ALL productivity problems, or even most of them, on Windows. Windows is simply the single best example of software that doesn't let our computers do what we need them to do in order to be more productive.
For a highly detailed analysis of the real problems we need to overcome, drop by your local BOOKSTORE and pick up
The Trouble with Computers by Thomas K. Landauer
It's an insightful, well-argued, and thoroughly documented exploration of the productivity problems which proliferative computing has failed to deal with effectively. I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in computer applications or the software industry.
It's one of the best books I've ever read, and it's helped arm me with a healthy critical attitude towards computers and the miracles they are purported to bring us.
*Note* however, that it's still up in the air whether Microsoft's influence on the software industry has helped prevent the proper advancement of software design techniques which we need to overcome stagnant productivity. To see what I mean, read the book...
It seems to me that these are people too lazy or unimaginative to make money by actually being productive/innovative/providing useful goods and services.
Think about it this way: cyber-squatting is like trying to own names of businesses that don't even exist yet! This would never be tolerated under trademark law, according to which you can't own a name without having a legitimate product or service associated with it...
A few choice quotes from the leeches:
>"The mainstream hasn't figured out the power of >the domain yet."
So, we're missing out on something? Sounds like desperate words from a desperate salesman...
>Many sellers blame the lack of bidders on the >ignorance of the buyers. "Most people don't know >what these things are worth,"
Or, just maybe, the lack of bidders can be attributed to the worthlessness of the product in the first place! Another poster accurately observed that any legitimate business could oust cyber-squatters by legal means. The squatters are simply playing a numbers game, trying to guess the names of successful businesses and then cash in by selling off a name which they appropriated but to which they have little real claim.
>"Most people don't recognize the value of those >names because they don't share the vision that >you have in the first place," added Provost. >"That's why we're not getting a lot of bites."
Here's another way of looking at it: you're making up names, buying them, and then complaining that no one else is going out and starting a successful business by that name, making you rich with *their* vision and hard work!?
Methinks the gravy-trainers doth protest too much, and should go do something useful for a change..
When will we start to hear about Quantum Networking?
I'm no expert on QM, and I believe that this particular aspect of the subject is controversial, but as I understand it, a plausible interpretation of Bohm's theory allows for the possibility of transmitting a readable signal to any point in the universe, instantly. That would sure beat the hell out of Gbit ethernet, and even that terabit line Siemens is working with... basically, anything that operated with light or electricity would be toast..
Open fire if you think this is way off base... given how much I know, you're probably right.
Notice they don't say anything about whether the allegations are true: instead they demand that the *exact versions of Windows in question* be ruled inadmissable as evidence in the trial!
The spokesman mentions offhand that admission of those Windows versions would 'violate the rules of evidence' but avoids mentioning the fact that they were simply presented as evidence late, after the standard discovery process.
So basically, they are sidestepping the real issue, which is that the allegations appear to be *true*, as has been reported for some time now by various sources.
To quote:
'For example, Microsoft VP Jim Allchin said in a 1991 memo that "I suggest (at least for systems) that we... consider changing our apps to not run unless the OS is our OS." '
(And it appears that Caldera is trying to introduce as evidence two versions of Windows in which this actually occurs.)...
'Sohn [the spokesman] said DR-DOS failed because it was outdated, not because of antitrust violations. "The world was moving toward graphical user interfaces," he said. "Microsoft bet the company on them. Novell and DRI didn't." '
This is typical Microsoft crap. The issue is not that Novell and DRI weren't also developing a competitor to Windows; the issue is that Windows used DOS for its guts, and relied on the widespread installation of DOS and its application base to make Windows successful, but then decided that they could appropriate the DR-DOS portion of the market by breaking DR-DOS under Windows, selling MS-DOS with every copy of Windows, and and quietly sweeping under the rug the fact that all Windows really was was a fucking extension and driver set coupled with a no-brainer graphical shell, all of which could have been run on another version of DOS.
And yet they protest vehemently against all the slings and arrows of truth. This is why Microsoft gets so little respect. Jeez...
...to expand its software purchase programs and implement them everywhere.
And really, do we think that there's tons of software out there that's really worth major purchase dollars like that? If we saw some really well focused and useful products, I think there might be a worthwhile reason to purchase. But right now, there just isn't that much to really compel schools-- most of which are underfunded, while many even fail to keep sufficient faculty because there is already so much spending in certain schools to keep pace with the technology market (something the school system just can't afford to do right now).
Oh, and for the US or any large education system, standard consumer/business pricing plans just won't be feasible.
Obviously we need research and development initiatives on a large scale. But at least some of the funding has to come from the industry. I think that given the number of large players soaking up the economy, there's enough cash collectively to do that, given the sheer difficulty of meeting costs and expanding facilities as is.
It mentions in the article that the thing can be used to scan for drugs and other "contraband".
Great. Does this mean I can't take my weed with me when I go on a flight anymore? Just what I need... more invasion of privacy, more danger of being busted for a harmless "crime".
...why Sony is prosecuting Playstation emulators so vigorously.
They are afraid that a permanent hardware-independent platform for playing Playstation1 games would cannibalize sales of the Playstation2 and its new games, which will surely be more expensive.
This is bad nooze for all of us would would gladly play Playstation games in emulation until a Playstation2 emulator comes out.
Slashdot Mirror
every time the player takes some damage. See if that makes this any worse?
Hmm, I wonder.
First, people need to stop comparing this stuff to electroconvulsive shock therapy, in which a current is applied across one or both lobes of the brain as a treatment for severe depression and other problems, and which can produce confusion, nausea, and memory loss.
ECT uses 1 amp at 160-500 volts, whereas this controller uses 0.016 amp at 1.5-4.5 volts (depending on how it's wired, I dunno.) So even if you connected the electrodes to the right spots on your head, you would still not be in the neighborhood of ECT treatment.
Second, and this is more important:
Good god! Has anybody thought of the psychological implications of this? Anyone who's played enough FPS's and other frenetic action games knows that it's not uncommon to have these games infect one's dreams -- you go to bed at 4am after several hours of Q3 deathmatches, and sleep to the din of rockets and shotgun blasts running through your head.
Reinforcing every wrong move with an unpleasant electric shock cannot make this any better. This controller may make for better CS players, but it's inevitably going to produce a few hundred 'twitch' cases as well. Can't be good.
I don't have much to say, other than, I can't believe you posted it...
>You see, Xerox did get paid- with Apple stock.
Heh, you might as well assign a hotkey to that line of text...
Also, the short-memory people also forget that the GUI and mouse were sitting around collecting dust. Xerox didn't have a clue what to do with them-- they just paid the researchers who thunk them up.
CJ
...even though I intensely dislike Windows and distrust Microsoft, I don't think it's fair to blame ALL productivity problems, or even most of them, on Windows. Windows is simply the single best example of software that doesn't let our computers do what we need them to do in order to be more productive.
For a highly detailed analysis of the real problems we need to overcome, drop by your local BOOKSTORE and pick up
The Trouble with Computers
by
Thomas K. Landauer
It's an insightful, well-argued, and thoroughly documented exploration of the productivity problems which proliferative computing has failed to deal with effectively. I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in computer applications or the software industry.
It's one of the best books I've ever read, and it's helped arm me with a healthy critical attitude towards computers and the miracles they are purported to bring us.
*Note* however, that it's still up in the air whether Microsoft's influence on the software industry has helped prevent the proper advancement of software design techniques which we need to overcome stagnant productivity. To see what I mean, read the book...
My $0.02
Chief Justice
is pretty low-brow. If not non-existent...
This kid is obviously intelligent and independent.
We must stop him before he becomes a threat to our stable and predictable society.
-CJ
>...but they're worthless for transmitting
information so in practice relativity still works.
This is exactly what may not be true if Bohm's theory accurately accounts for quantum phenomena..
At least, that's what I think David Z. Albert was saying in class...
It seems to me that these are people too lazy or unimaginative to make money by actually being productive/innovative/providing useful goods and services.
Think about it this way: cyber-squatting is like trying to own names of businesses that don't even exist yet! This would never be tolerated under trademark law, according to which you can't own a name without having a legitimate product or service associated with it...
A few choice quotes from the leeches:
>"The mainstream hasn't figured out the power of >the domain yet."
So, we're missing out on something? Sounds like desperate words from a desperate salesman...
>Many sellers blame the lack of bidders on the >ignorance of the buyers. "Most people don't know
>what these things are worth,"
Or, just maybe, the lack of bidders can be attributed to the worthlessness of the product in the first place! Another poster accurately observed that any legitimate business could oust cyber-squatters by legal means. The squatters are simply playing a numbers game, trying to guess the names of successful businesses and then cash in by selling off a name which they appropriated but to which they have little real claim.
>"Most people don't recognize the value of those >names because they don't share the vision that >you have in the first place," added Provost. >"That's why we're not getting a lot of bites."
Here's another way of looking at it: you're making up names, buying them, and then complaining that no one else is going out and starting a successful business by that name, making you rich with *their* vision and hard work!?
Methinks the gravy-trainers doth protest too much, and should go do something useful for a change..
My 2 cents...
Chief Justice
When will we start to hear about Quantum Networking?
I'm no expert on QM, and I believe that this particular aspect of the subject is controversial, but as I understand it, a plausible interpretation of Bohm's theory allows for the possibility of transmitting a readable signal to any point in the universe, instantly. That would sure beat the hell out of Gbit ethernet, and even that terabit line Siemens is working with... basically, anything that operated with light or electricity would be toast..
Open fire if you think this is way off base... given how much I know, you're probably right.
Anyway, just a random thought..
...for loopholes.
... consider changing our apps to not run unless the OS is our OS." '
...
Notice they don't say anything about whether the allegations are true: instead they demand that the *exact versions of Windows in question* be ruled inadmissable as evidence in the trial!
The spokesman mentions offhand that admission of those Windows versions would 'violate the rules of evidence' but avoids mentioning the fact that they were simply presented as evidence late, after the standard discovery process.
So basically, they are sidestepping the real issue, which is that the allegations appear to be *true*, as has been reported for some time now by various sources.
To quote:
'For example, Microsoft VP Jim Allchin said in a
1991 memo that "I suggest (at least for systems) that we
(And it appears that Caldera is trying to introduce as evidence two versions of Windows in which this actually occurs.)
'Sohn [the spokesman] said DR-DOS failed because it was outdated, not because of antitrust violations. "The world was moving toward graphical user interfaces," he said. "Microsoft bet the company on them. Novell and DRI didn't." '
This is typical Microsoft crap. The issue is not that Novell and DRI weren't also developing a competitor to Windows; the issue is that Windows used DOS for its guts, and relied on the widespread installation of DOS and its application base to make Windows successful, but then decided that they could appropriate the DR-DOS portion of the market by breaking DR-DOS under Windows, selling MS-DOS with every copy of Windows, and and quietly sweeping under the rug the fact that all Windows really was was a fucking extension and driver set coupled with a no-brainer graphical shell, all of which could have been run on another version of DOS.
And yet they protest vehemently against all the slings and arrows of truth. This is why Microsoft gets so little respect. Jeez...
My 2...
Chief Justice
...to expand its software purchase programs and implement them everywhere.
And really, do we think that there's tons of software out there that's really worth major purchase dollars like that? If we saw some really well focused and useful products, I think there might be a worthwhile reason to purchase. But right now, there just isn't that much to really compel schools-- most of which are underfunded, while many even fail to keep sufficient faculty because there is already so much spending in certain schools to keep pace with the technology market (something the school system just can't afford to do right now).
Oh, and for the US or any large education system, standard consumer/business pricing plans just won't be feasible.
Obviously we need research and development initiatives on a large scale. But at least some of the funding has to come from the industry. I think that given the number of large players soaking up the economy, there's enough cash collectively to do that, given the sheer difficulty of meeting costs and expanding facilities as is.
It mentions in the article that the thing can be used to scan for drugs and other "contraband".
Great. Does this mean I can't take my weed with me when I go on a flight anymore? Just what I need... more invasion of privacy, more danger of being busted for a harmless "crime".
...why Sony is prosecuting Playstation emulators so vigorously.
They are afraid that a permanent hardware-independent platform for playing Playstation1 games would cannibalize sales of the Playstation2 and its new games, which will surely be more expensive.
This is bad nooze for all of us would would gladly play Playstation games in emulation until a Playstation2 emulator comes out.