Now, since Google can't do much more there, hopefully it will mean that they can come here.
My 20x1 internet is painful to say the least... Unfortunately, to get better speed I have to go back to Comcast... which I admit is worse than pouring salt into an open wound.
from the President that has the courage to admit to fault, and grant him a pardon for bringing such an egregious overstep of personal freedom to light...
When you need to use a "Trick" to avoid legal harassment by the system, the system has failed.
There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our system was designed so that stupidity, ignorance, or naivety would not be a crime. Unfortunately, that day has passed.
It now seems to be about loop-holes, tricks, and double-standards. Not really life-affirming.
It's funny, when the Blackberry Curve came out, I remember thinking of how much the keyboard and layout reminded me of my Treo 600...
And now, ~10 years later, Blackberry is suing someone for something they didn't even create... I don't see Handspring/Palm/PalmOne having a tiff about it (but then again, maybe if they sued everyone who came out with something more desirable than their product, they might still be around soaking up others' profits...)
Don't get me wrong. I believe that someone who creates something has a right to profit off of it, without some second-rate hack coming in and stealing the idea out from under them.
But, seriously, the keyboard design? It wasn't original when it was on the Blackberry, and it still isn't original now that Blackberry is going the way of the dodo.
If they are not using the data, then why are they collecting it? It's probably the simplest question that brings the whole altruistic big brother theory to its knees (and proceeds to shoot an arrow into it).
I can not, and will not believe that an agency that is designed around exploiting secrets has my best interests in mind. Which is why they are *NOT* supposed to operate on our soil. They can not have the best interests of those they collect information on, since the whole purpose of the information is for their interests.
I have worked on projects that have taken upwards of 8 hours for a full compile. There is a lot of validity behind the business impact of different compilers.
The current mentality of throw more horse power at a problem is not always the practical, or the logical conclusion. If you can improve your overall compile time, it can improve your productive time.
From a Build Engineering perspective, analyzing why it takes time for a project to compile is one of the most important metrics.
Not only do I monitor how long a project takes to compile, but I also keep an active average, and try to maintain highs and lows to identify compile spikes.
We monitor processor(s), disk access speeds, memory loads, build warnings, change size, concurred builds, etc.
We look at all possible solutions. With the current build tools we have, we can either provision another build system for the queue, or if necessary increase memory, or disk space, or faster drives, more processors, or even upgraded software. We have gone as far as home-grown fixes to get around issues until better solutions become available.
All of this needs to be accounted for, so, not only is compile time relevant, but what is CAUSING compile times is relevant.
It's not shocking, considering the current disregard for personal privacy currently administered by the government. It may be shocking if you take out the fact that many people are already aware of the fact that we have lost the war on privacy, and now are just going through the dance pretending that it's something we can win.
The US government has had a taste of knowing everything, and now thinks that it is our best interest to suspend/revoke/rewrite privacy laws because they just hinder investigations. Nevermind the fact that the rights of citizens should come first by our own principals.
Either way, shocking or not, this has been going on for over 10 years now, and will only get more invasive as new ways are revealed, and we become more complacent to the methods already used.
Even though there are those of us that disagree with this, and fight it as much as we can, it will not change the fact that the general population already has the mentality of "If you have nothing to hide...", and the government continues to keep it's mis-fires localized and on the "fringe", people will continue to give up their rights until we reach that ever lovable point of no return (which I honestly believe we have already passed).
After reading through all three pages (the first page being a real push not to read further), I was able to almost find out more about the new OS.
Being fairly anti-mac (I am also anti-windows, but use it every day anyways...), I was wondering what the new offerings were, and what it might actually have to compete.
And I have to say, I was completely unsuprised. By both the reviewer and the review. The direction appears to be divergent of functional use, and more in line with "synergistic management solutions". Bringing more shared functionality between devices (and I do see this as a boon for the Apple "Brand").
On the same note from what I read, the concerns I have (about the review and the reviewer) are as follows: Audio HAL... Unless Apple redefined HAL, a hardware abstraction layer in direct access devices is nothing new. Linux has had it since day one, with/dev. Windows reintroduced it in a meaningful way with DirectX 1.0 (before that there were third party solutions). So, I am not really sure if this is new to Mac, or if there was new functionality introduced, but as it stands, it feels like a Jeep thing, and I just don't get it...
OS bound password storage... Yeah, NO. The last thing (and I am not just being my normal paranoid self) I would ever want is my operating system to upload my authentication information up to a third party (them) storage container. Not only do I as an individual have to worry about their security, their intentions, and well the honesty of every one of their employees, it seems to be a lazy, sloppy, and self-defeating method of security. If you are going to give your passwords to someone else to keep them safe, why are you using passwords (Yes, I am aware, we have no choice)?
Wireless external monitor support... Love the idea, I wish that the wireless HDMI support actually went somewhere. I keep a half a dozen pcs within kissing distance of my T.V. It would be nice to be able to use my T.V. as an alternate display. With that being said, it's another tribute to the catch all AirPlay concept. Great for Apple, but highly limiting to the level of supported devices and environments. I would rather have my choice of devices, but, then again, that's why I appreciate their business model, and don't buy their products.
The last thing I would like to mention is the fact that the article holds to a standard format of first give a positive impression. Then outline some real world issues, then leave on a positive note. This leaves the impression that it is a highly biased review. The OS is obviously struggling, and there are some areas that are fairly niche where it is struggling, but when one of the core benefits you outline is directly (or indirectly) related to the the most significant issue they are struggling with, it is not a positive thing. It is something to watch for, and unless it is a must have technology, or you are a developer looking to get in at the ground floor, this is actually something you want to avoid until it is resolved.
Many Linux and Windows people have suffered through early adoption. And while the concept of early adoption is fairly foreign to Apple (I won't go into the semantics of it, but open-source, and open development have caused both Windows and Linux to display research and development opportunities that very few Apple users have had a chance to really experience), there are growing pains that comes with it. Now, this doesn't mean that I think that the new OS will fail, or that it will be anything less than a raving success.
I won't even go as far as to say that the only people who will buy into this are Mac Fanboys. I don't think that will be the case. Apple has proven time and again that "Synergistic Management Solutions" work. And this is a step towards a more integrated solution. That means more adopters, and ideally a more "Dedicated Ecosystem". As a result, they should see a growth in their market. But, this needs to be taken with a grain of salt. When companies make steps like this, they always falter. And a blind review does not directly help the cause. Bashing it doesn't help either. Apple has their work cut out for them, and this is one of the biggest risks I have seen them take in quite a few years.
I think the most ironic part about this post (and it was really hard to pick one thing as the most ironic...) was that every single item mentioned is a conservative propaganda talking point.
While there were those who have been citing for years now that: The IRS has had powers to influence companies without proper oversight. While all the way back to the 80s (and before) there were cases of the IRS performing targeted auditing that had driven companies out of business with nothing more than false information or a clerical error on the IRS's side.
The warrentless FBI issue has been brought up several times with people who have been nothing more that remotely related to those who the government is interested in, or by people who have simply posted something on facebook. There are hundreds of complaints out about this, but, it happens to the media once (after they do the same thing to a government only a couple years before), and all of a sudden people bring up the issue.
There is a reason the "Fast & Furious" gun fiasco disappeared out of the news almost as quickly as it came in. It wasn't an attempt at gun control, lack of gun control made the case fall apart. Because they couldn't arrest anyone distributing guns to those who would do us harm, they had to "watch" (and they still do on a daily basis) guns sold in the US go to people who would do us harm. But as the laws stand, until the gun is used in a crime, there does not need to be a trail of the gun ownership, which means any private citizen can sell a gun to someone who can not legally own one. There was only one gun that "walked" in the F&F ordeal. All the rest were monitored sales.
I won't even comment on a single person commenting on wanting to take our guns. That just seems silly.
Meanwhile,
We have groups of people who are targeted and arrested because they are hide their faces and participate in public gatherings without warrents.
We have police infiltrating religious groups in order to bait and catch potential "threats".
We have laws being put in place that restrict people from respecting their religious views (Christian, Muslim, Hindi, or otherwise) because it might offend atheists.
We have regulations put in place so that citizens must answer to businesses, while regulations (or the agencies responsible for the regulations) depleted so that businesses do not have to answer to citizens.
We have raving geniuses (sarcasm alert) publicly posting information that can only do harm. And while I am all for the free exchange of information. Only a complete idiot would think that releasing schematics for a printed gun will not be used to kill innocent people. It is only a matter of time. And by proving something people already knew, all they did was make it easier for people who would normally be too dumb to figure it out to do harm. Knowledge is a responsibility, and should be handled as such.
We have people leaking government information endangering lives, policy, and stability because they feel people should know, or for their own personal gain. Again, knowledge is power, taking that from those who protect us does nothing but prevent them from being able to protect us. Now, if the government, or someone in the government is obviously doing something counter to the nations security or stability, it should be raised up. But not in this crazy partisan banter that seems to snowball.
There are news stories of police shooting children trying to protect the same people they are killing.
We live in a world where Governments have lost control of their own borders. And as a result, they (in the case of the US, and many other countries at the behest of their own citizens and elected officials) are targeting it's own citizens to create a feeling of safety.
And if you think the little things you mentioned are anything near the nightmare that already exists, you are so lost.
With the escalated fear of those who are not us, you have citizens attacking innocent
Thank you, with how many people seem to think that it is the responsibility of the victim to make sure that they are properly protected against idiots, it is nice to hear some sanity.
I personally think 30 months is too short. And the man should have been charged with attempted murder once for every person in each aircraft.
People need to become more conscious of their actions. If you know something "fun" that can kill people, you should still be charged with attempted murder, even if you were too stupid to realize your actions could have resulted in death.
But, you do end up in a grey area of what is a stupid attempt, and what is an honest mistake. However, in this case, it was obviously not a mistake, it was just stupid "fun".
As for his statement that he didn't know it was dangerous only leads to the fact that people are continuously using things without understanding what it is that they use. All laser pointers come with warnings. Even if his friend removed the label before letting his friend use it, the friend should also be responsible for notifying his friend of the dangers.
There is also the fact that this kid was not aware of the fact that it was illegal.
Now I know I am getting old, but the repeated use of the "I didn't know" defense sickens me every time I hear it in the news. What level of stupidity is required for people to do something they have no idea what they are doing?
I have been slowly getting my niece into astronomy, and now I have to deal with keeping up with these idiots causing new laws getting created, so I then have to research them, so that I can continue to teach her how to look at the stars responsibly, and while, it is obvious to keep pointers out of flight paths, now, before going to a new place I need to make sure I am more than 10 miles away from any registered airport.
After reading the article (and at times, it seems that the article is biased one way or the other. A rather interesting read from a technical stand-point). It is in no way commenting on the quality of the Android System or is it truly comparing Android vs Blackberry vs iOS vs Windows 7 (yeah, they list Windows 7 in the research, but it didn't make it to the writers page... Interesting).
The point and reason for the research was to analyze and report on Android as a platform and a supportable system. It identifies key characteristics in the serviceability of the Android (using other systems as a point of reference), and while they believe that the fragmentation (which they believe is the reason for the fact that 14% of all Android calls are hardware vs 7% and 6% of iOS and Blackberry), that factor does not outweigh the positive that such a model brings (pretty much the first paragraph in the report's summary).
Needless to say, with WDS posting it with such a poorly worded title, and the ability for other reviewers to lazily recap the title, and lead-in to the report (ok, they have 1 paragraph to represent a 17 page document, of which they selected to partially represent the hardware fault outline... Partially).
There are also several mis-quotes in the article that are rather telling. e.g.: WDS noted in its report. “Deployment by more than 25 OEMs and lower-cost product coming to market is leading to higher than average rates of hardware failures and, in turn, return and repair costs.”
Actual report text (page 4): "Its use exploded and today the OS is deployed by more than 35 OEMs2 , offering an accessible and customizable platform that has resonated with manufacturers and mobile operators alike."
-- These stats are not even in the report. There is a graph that represents amounts per type of issue, but they do not give hard numbers in the report and w/o the graph, you do not see that the stats are fairly balanced between device with each device having a specific high fault area, except android.
12.6% of all technical support calls related to Android in the study were for hardware failures related to the touchscreen, buttons, speakers, microphones and battery performance. Just 9.3% of Windows Phone, 8% of iOS calls and 5.5% of BlackBerry calls were related to hardware failures. -- Actual report text (): "While Android deployments may show a higher propensity to hardware failures than rival OS platforms, analysis of these hardware faults shows no principle defects on the platform; ie: the platform is not predisposed to one particular hardware defect. Instead, the distribution of hardware faults against weighted averages deviates by less than 1% in all categories. In this instance, Android actually benefits from deployment across multiple reference designs and component variants. This means that the brand is unlikely to be associated with a specific hardware shortcoming." ===
The rest of the article goes on to only quote the press release.
This case would be a sad state of patent law if this company does win. While Nintendo may have been made aware of the patent when they applied for the trademark, they had already completed their development of the device before this had happened. This is not a unique situation, just rare. It would appear that the company that wrote the patent did it at the same time (or VERY close) to the announcement of the WiiMote. Which was announced 2 months after the patent was filed At the Tokyo Game Show(See: http://tgs.cesa.or.jp/2005/english/). So, considering the fact that the controller was announced, it would be a fair assumption that they did not start development on the controller within the 60 day window between a filing of a US patent, and announcing their product. Obviously Nintendo will have to prove that was infact the case, but having worked on a patent suit in the past, that part is the easy thing to prove. This whole Trademark red-herring will probably be more of an annoyance then anything.
Also keep in mind, while the patent was filed in 2005, it wasn't published until 2006. There is no way that Nintendo could have known about this product via it's patent until they had completed their development, and started contracts for mass production for their November 2006 release. Considering the 3-5 year R&D cycle on these systems, the timeline with the patent don't line up for an infringement. However, it should give Nintendo an exception to the patent, while still allowing the company to hold it's patent (which may actually be the point of the suit, to prevent Nintendo from being identified as prior art).
On a side note, Nintendo filed their patent in Japan one month before this other company did in the US. see: http://www19.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/PA1/cgi-bin/PA1DETAIL Publication name: 2006-331109 Filing date: 26.05.2005 Application Number: 2005-154233
This is something I consider one of the greatest downfalls in current society. The ability to make a point by taking 90% of an idea, and leaving out 10% because it doesn't fit (and yes the 90/10 rule is arbitrary for any of sticklers for detail).
In the case of the author, they literally define faith by stating aspects that people take from scientists, and then proclaim it faith. Yes, Faith requires Trust. Yes, Faith requires belief. However, as my pastor taught me, with question, there is doubt, with doubt, there is no faith. Without faith you will always find fault with God. And while I do consider myself a God-fearing person, I don't have faith in God, and I can't as long as I see the name of God used in such a way as to take away from someone else.
The point of science is that you question all, trust what can be proven, and believe in what you see. This are the principals of scientific discovery, and for anything to be considered a truth, they must pass these principals, and be confirmed by more then the original observer. Otherwise they are theories. And while it is fun for someone of faith to attack theories, the problem there is that until a theory is proven to be true or false, it is just a theory, and to be taken on believe, and only trusted as far as it can be thrown. It should never be considered on faith. Nothing in the scientific world is taken on faith. And every time a scientist does take something on faith, the community is ready to correct them.
While I don't agree with Sony's practices, and well, they have no idea of how negatively their tactics impact their sales. However, as Sony is not the only company impacted by this. Yesterday was the first time in over a month that I powered up my PS3 to download and install Socom 4 Beta, and well, I was lucky enough to download and install it, I was done after that as I could no longer connect to their network.
So, while I can see why they think it's a great idea by bringing attention to these issues, they really are no different then (and forgive me, but it really is the same) the Tea Party. Young idealistic people who think that they can change the world by running head first at the establishment and thinking it will change. It is counter-productive, and tends to cause the established group to over-compensate.
With SciFi changing it's name to imply they are more than science fiction. Then taking one of the greatest cult classic Science Fiction classics to a prequel that is brooding and dramatic, and neo-social-political rather than anything actually SciFi (other than the occasional scene in the virtual world, which was incredibly like the real world for all intents and purposes, and a quick 5 minute robot scene a season)... Are they trying to convert geeks into socialites, or convince socialites they are geeky???
I mean really, to say that science fiction (which made them one of the greatest channels on cable) is too much of a niche market, they need to be like every other cable channel is kinda sad, and depressing.
It's hard enough that MTV switched to TV shows, and Cartoon Network is going to Live Action... What next, Comedy Central actually getting a Real News Show??? (btw, if that last one actually happens, I will turn off cable for life... and I will know that it is truly the end of the beginning of the end)
Haven is good, it holds a strong character base, the story lines are fairly original while holding to the sort of traditional ghoulies. Sanctuary is up there, and I am glad it's back. Story and characters are all over the place, but it's fun to watch... Eureka is just fun (ok getting a little like heros with it's constant character reset, and the fact that you can tell the writters have NO CLUE what they are doing). Warehouse 13 is Friday the 13th the series re-invented. Probably one of my favorite shows. Caprica... well, they could have gotten rid of the cylons, and left everything else in, and ran it on USA and nobody would have known or cared... It actually probably would have sold as a show if it was played right after psyched (ok maybe a little too dark for that... after dead zone maybe...)
I haven't tried out the Google device yet. The Apple unit is decent, but it's so focused on TV rental that it makes it difficult to work with an existing library of media; between the transcoding, and tedious menu navigation... well, it's a good thing it's only $99. It's a dang cheap way to get your stuff on your bigger screens, provided you're willing to jump through the necessary hoops.
OK, after reading the article, and practically having a brain spasm from the complete degradation of intelligence, I had to go back and review the initial snippet posted and lets start from there.
First the reviewer (which by the first sentence can't even be considered a reviewer, but rather an Apple Fanboy attempting to get the jump on a story, and spin it their way) hasn't even used the Google device. By that statement alone, they can not say any round has gone to anyone, because they haven't even stepped out of the gate to make a comparison.
Next, they compare the price of a pay for service device to a free to use device. Ok, what's the long term cost comparison? If the first gen google device is 300 dollars, but connects you to free/pay services, what type of costs are you going to incur over the use of the product, and how much would a person have to dish out to the apple device for comparable service?
Next they refer to Google going after source1 or whatever they call it. Now I am a videophile, so I have just a few connections on my TV, and my receiver. With that being said, most are full... But I can say this for certain, there is no first and second connection on either. The AV Ports may have a 1 and a 2, the HDMI ports may have a 1 and a 2, there is also the CbTV/Sat port, and the aux port... They are just monikers. To say that Google is looking to replace the Cable box (which is the mis-informed implication, and by mis-informed, they take a piece of information that may or may not be correct, and turn the direction of it into something that is incorrect to cause the reader to be mis-informed about the actuality of the situation) has nothing to do with the complexity to connect the device. Seriously, who wrote this? A 10 year old child wanting to be accepted for being cool and liking something?
Both devices have their points, and both have their negatives. I have a natural fear for Apples rights and property management, and a natural fear of Googles obsession with personal information. So, I am most likely to go with Google, since it's easier to mask personal information than it is to hack the rights of stuff you spent money on, and suddenly can no longer access (or worse, apple changes formats, than your old stuff becomes dated... again).
There's a lot of libertarians here on Slashdot. Well, this is what a libertarian utopia looks like, kids. If this strikes you as unjust and cruel, you'd probably better stop listening to Glen Beck on the teevee, and start voting for candidates who believe that government is a useful thing.
(If, on the other hand, you're happy with the outcome of this story, that's cool, you're not a hypocrite, and, we can agree to disagree.)
As for "why not put out the fire and then bill him", the $75 fee is not to put out the fire, it's to keep the fire department running when there *isn't* a fire. You can no more pay the bill after you need the service than you can wait until after you get cancer to start paying for medical insurance. The system can't work that way.
Hmm, that's an interesting theory. I should try and take that to the grocery store the next time I go... I wonder if they will not accept my money when I pick out my groceries, because I didn't pay them ahead of time...
Yes, there is a cost associated with putting the fire out. Ideally the fire dept could determine their cost in man-hours and supplies, and bill the family for it... Of course the current situation implies that the family wouldn't pay...
Either way, I only feel bad for the animals in this. The family obviously could afford the 75 dollars, and basic logic implies that one should pay for necessities first, security second, and luxury last, while saving for the future. It would be an easy assumption that this family passed up on #2, so now they need to replace #1. There is a price for everything, and this is no exception.
After having worked in the consumer software industry, I have seen sales and marketing depts. alike try and push their vision of what is happening, but this has to be an all time high for diluted morons.
It's easy to understand how, from a market share and revenue standpoint they want this to be true. But, I am getting so tired of them (yes, the proverbial they) dictating what is going to happen because it benefits them the most...
Well, Good luck Microsoft, hope it benefits you as much as Nintendo benefited from sticking with Carts, and from your backing for HD-DVDs...
Since all Cellphone services support a network update push. The simple answer is yes. There is always the SMS push issues have have crept up as of late, but the most likely exploit will be in the Service Update process. However, to my knowledge no such exploit exists... yet. And of course there is the possibility of an app doing it, but I can't imagine that app developer ever staying out of jail for long. Let alone the app making it into the app store.
There was a story a while back of Toyota attempting to open a plant in the Southern US, but the plans were scrapped when potential employees failed the aptitude tests... And the plant was built in Canada... And we question if it was the drivers or the company... I rarely side with the company, but this time, you have 3 systems that have to all fail in a way that makes it undetectable for failure (I am sure they checked the sensors to verify that they worked, or that adds a 4th system that would have also needed to fail), or a user pressing on the wrong pedal... Now is it the pedal's fault, or the manufacturers that the user can not figure out how to properly use the vehicle? Seriously, that can not be the way that we address every issue. Otherwise we will lose sight of objectivity, and never be able to account for our own actions.
Now that the precedent has been set, the "alternate" meaning of the word will slowly become common place, and in time, we will learn to accept Open Source as a corporate entitlement, granted by us paying them for the rights to use their code... I was wondering how long it would take. Took longer than I expected.
Actually ways is a pluralized singular word taken from an olde English word (1588) wayes. While it is the same as the word way, it does have very specific contexts that it is used in the English language, in both Queens and American English. Most people are just not taught it, and either pick up it's usage through general day to day speech. But either ways, it is just a reference to either the same idea or concept conveyed by it's non-pluralized brother as an adverb or noun. Common examples are:
sideways - The hat sat on his head sideways. If you tried the same sentence using the word sideway it just doesn't work...
Always - Not a fair example, but same root, same result. You will never hear someone say alway.
ways - (n) The old man is stuck in his ways.
- (adv) He had a ways to go, but he got there.
While the first sentence may sound correct with way, the proper word is ways. It is not a colloquialism or an idiom, but rather proper speech. The second sentence could be a long way to go, but again, the proper adverb when not using an adjective is ways, not way. Just one of those wonderful bizarre details with the English language. We have too many words for the same meaning, and the context and usage matters. In this case, it's a very old word we just use, and most people no longer realize there is a difference between the usage of ways and way. But, there is, in a very subtle context.
As a noun, it represents an idea of a pluralized singularity. All the ways are his. Whenever you try to summize a multitude into a single context, way becomes ways. Rare, but for some silly reason the context exists.
As an adverb, it again works to pluralize a single context. There are multiple ways for "it" to go. It, being the context of the verb, creates a singular entity to focus the ways upon. I am not aware of any other word that actually operates in that fashion, but I am sure they are out there.
And as far as as I am aware, ways is only used like this as an adverb or noun. At no other time can you create a context that can contain this odd scenario... But then again, I am not really that knowledgeable about the English language...
I am glad I heard that Devo is back to sing play out the end of days. While I agree that things will probably get twisted, I would like to see higher band-widths available to the general public. The general demoralizing and insulting response to something the government is *trying* to improve is funny. It's like kids getting upset with their parents promising a pony for a birthday. Instead of being happy at the COMPLETELY ridiculous gift, the insults and concerns of: well, if I even get the pony, who is going to feed it, where is it going to stay, my parents aren't even going to give me time to play with it, it will probably kick me, nobody else is going to get a pony, I already bought my own pony...
Lighten up people, you will have enough time to complain when things fail.
Targeted test, towards a targeted response. My wife and I get in this discussion all the time. I prefer to watch TV, play with my cats, and work/play on my computer at the same time. I typically work best like this. The key is, as people have mentioned, multitasking is very much like a computer. Each device/sense/ability are only capable of one process at a time, however, typing, breathing, sitting upright, listening to music, do not conflict with each other. If I were to add in anything that took away from one of the others, I would be unable to maintain.
The above test measured the wrong information. It was looking for cognitive multitasking. I seriously doubt it is possible for a human to cognitively multitask. We can hear and parse multiple conversations (I would have no idea of how many the average person can handle, but I peak out at about 3, and I am not very good at it), but we can only maintain one conscience stream of data at a time. This means, you have a conversation with someone, you may be able to keep track of what someone else is saying, but you are not likely, and definitely not proficiently going to be able to carry out a conversation with another. You may be able to hear what they say (one of the ways we can switch conversations and topics in conversation, the above mentioned ability to parse multiple conversations). But each time you switch between conversation, you have to break your stream of thought, interject the new conversation, and carry on with it. Then you switch back, but it's not multitasking, it's more in line with serial processing.
So, can people multitask, you have to, in order to function. But, to what level, and how do you do it is a different question (or 2).
Personally, I will listen to music, or watch TV while programing because it helps me focus on programming. It gives me a constant stream of data to keep my other senses busy while I focus my train of thought on what I am writing/designing. However, when the wife stops in, and sees me doing this, and deciding I can handle a conversation everything goes south, and a fight will typically break out.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, since Google can't do much more there, hopefully it will mean that they can come here.
My 20x1 internet is painful to say the least... Unfortunately, to get better speed I have to go back to Comcast... which I admit is worse than pouring salt into an open wound.
from the President that has the courage to admit to fault, and grant him a pardon for bringing such an egregious overstep of personal freedom to light...
When you need to use a "Trick" to avoid legal harassment by the system, the system has failed.
There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our system was designed so that stupidity, ignorance, or naivety would not be a crime. Unfortunately, that day has passed.
It now seems to be about loop-holes, tricks, and double-standards. Not really life-affirming.
It's funny, when the Blackberry Curve came out, I remember thinking of how much the keyboard and layout reminded me of my Treo 600...
And now, ~10 years later, Blackberry is suing someone for something they didn't even create... I don't see Handspring/Palm/PalmOne having a tiff about it (but then again, maybe if they sued everyone who came out with something more desirable than their product, they might still be around soaking up others' profits...)
Don't get me wrong. I believe that someone who creates something has a right to profit off of it, without some second-rate hack coming in and stealing the idea out from under them.
But, seriously, the keyboard design? It wasn't original when it was on the Blackberry, and it still isn't original now that Blackberry is going the way of the dodo.
Does anyone actually believe any of this drivel?
If they are not using the data, then why are they collecting it? It's probably the simplest question that brings the whole altruistic big brother theory to its knees (and proceeds to shoot an arrow into it).
I can not, and will not believe that an agency that is designed around exploiting secrets has my best interests in mind. Which is why they are *NOT* supposed to operate on our soil. They can not have the best interests of those they collect information on, since the whole purpose of the information is for their interests.
I have worked on projects that have taken upwards of 8 hours for a full compile. There is a lot of validity behind the business impact of different compilers.
The current mentality of throw more horse power at a problem is not always the practical, or the logical conclusion. If you can improve your overall compile time, it can improve your productive time.
From a Build Engineering perspective, analyzing why it takes time for a project to compile is one of the most important metrics.
Not only do I monitor how long a project takes to compile, but I also keep an active average, and try to maintain highs and lows to identify compile spikes.
We monitor processor(s), disk access speeds, memory loads, build warnings, change size, concurred builds, etc.
We look at all possible solutions. With the current build tools we have, we can either provision another build system for the queue, or if necessary increase memory, or disk space, or faster drives, more processors, or even upgraded software. We have gone as far as home-grown fixes to get around issues until better solutions become available.
All of this needs to be accounted for, so, not only is compile time relevant, but what is CAUSING compile times is relevant.
It's not shocking, considering the current disregard for personal privacy currently administered by the government. It may be shocking if you take out the fact that many people are already aware of the fact that we have lost the war on privacy, and now are just going through the dance pretending that it's something we can win.
The US government has had a taste of knowing everything, and now thinks that it is our best interest to suspend/revoke/rewrite privacy laws because they just hinder investigations. Nevermind the fact that the rights of citizens should come first by our own principals.
Either way, shocking or not, this has been going on for over 10 years now, and will only get more invasive as new ways are revealed, and we become more complacent to the methods already used.
Even though there are those of us that disagree with this, and fight it as much as we can, it will not change the fact that the general population already has the mentality of "If you have nothing to hide...", and the government continues to keep it's mis-fires localized and on the "fringe", people will continue to give up their rights until we reach that ever lovable point of no return (which I honestly believe we have already passed).
After reading through all three pages (the first page being a real push not to read further), I was able to almost find out more about the new OS.
Being fairly anti-mac (I am also anti-windows, but use it every day anyways...), I was wondering what the new offerings were, and what it might actually have to compete.
And I have to say, I was completely unsuprised. By both the reviewer and the review. The direction appears to be divergent of functional use, and more in line with "synergistic management solutions". Bringing more shared functionality between devices (and I do see this as a boon for the Apple "Brand").
On the same note from what I read, the concerns I have (about the review and the reviewer) are as follows: /dev. Windows reintroduced it in a meaningful way with DirectX 1.0 (before that there were third party solutions). So, I am not really sure if this is new to Mac, or if there was new functionality introduced, but as it stands, it feels like a Jeep thing, and I just don't get it...
Audio HAL... Unless Apple redefined HAL, a hardware abstraction layer in direct access devices is nothing new. Linux has had it since day one, with
OS bound password storage... Yeah, NO. The last thing (and I am not just being my normal paranoid self) I would ever want is my operating system to upload my authentication information up to a third party (them) storage container. Not only do I as an individual have to worry about their security, their intentions, and well the honesty of every one of their employees, it seems to be a lazy, sloppy, and self-defeating method of security. If you are going to give your passwords to someone else to keep them safe, why are you using passwords (Yes, I am aware, we have no choice)?
Wireless external monitor support... Love the idea, I wish that the wireless HDMI support actually went somewhere. I keep a half a dozen pcs within kissing distance of my T.V. It would be nice to be able to use my T.V. as an alternate display. With that being said, it's another tribute to the catch all AirPlay concept. Great for Apple, but highly limiting to the level of supported devices and environments. I would rather have my choice of devices, but, then again, that's why I appreciate their business model, and don't buy their products.
The last thing I would like to mention is the fact that the article holds to a standard format of first give a positive impression. Then outline some real world issues, then leave on a positive note. This leaves the impression that it is a highly biased review. The OS is obviously struggling, and there are some areas that are fairly niche where it is struggling, but when one of the core benefits you outline is directly (or indirectly) related to the the most significant issue they are struggling with, it is not a positive thing. It is something to watch for, and unless it is a must have technology, or you are a developer looking to get in at the ground floor, this is actually something you want to avoid until it is resolved.
Many Linux and Windows people have suffered through early adoption. And while the concept of early adoption is fairly foreign to Apple (I won't go into the semantics of it, but open-source, and open development have caused both Windows and Linux to display research and development opportunities that very few Apple users have had a chance to really experience), there are growing pains that comes with it. Now, this doesn't mean that I think that the new OS will fail, or that it will be anything less than a raving success.
I won't even go as far as to say that the only people who will buy into this are Mac Fanboys. I don't think that will be the case. Apple has proven time and again that "Synergistic Management Solutions" work. And this is a step towards a more integrated solution. That means more adopters, and ideally a more "Dedicated Ecosystem". As a result, they should see a growth in their market. But, this needs to be taken with a grain of salt. When companies make steps like this, they always falter. And a blind review does not directly help the cause. Bashing it doesn't help either. Apple has their work cut out for them, and this is one of the biggest risks I have seen them take in quite a few years.
I think the most ironic part about this post (and it was really hard to pick one thing as the most ironic...) was that every single item mentioned is a conservative propaganda talking point.
While there were those who have been citing for years now that:
The IRS has had powers to influence companies without proper oversight. While all the way back to the 80s (and before) there were cases of the IRS performing targeted auditing that had driven companies out of business with nothing more than false information or a clerical error on the IRS's side.
The warrentless FBI issue has been brought up several times with people who have been nothing more that remotely related to those who the government is interested in, or by people who have simply posted something on facebook. There are hundreds of complaints out about this, but, it happens to the media once (after they do the same thing to a government only a couple years before), and all of a sudden people bring up the issue.
There is a reason the "Fast & Furious" gun fiasco disappeared out of the news almost as quickly as it came in. It wasn't an attempt at gun control, lack of gun control made the case fall apart. Because they couldn't arrest anyone distributing guns to those who would do us harm, they had to "watch" (and they still do on a daily basis) guns sold in the US go to people who would do us harm. But as the laws stand, until the gun is used in a crime, there does not need to be a trail of the gun ownership, which means any private citizen can sell a gun to someone who can not legally own one. There was only one gun that "walked" in the F&F ordeal. All the rest were monitored sales.
I won't even comment on a single person commenting on wanting to take our guns. That just seems silly.
Meanwhile,
We have groups of people who are targeted and arrested because they are hide their faces and participate in public gatherings without warrents.
We have police infiltrating religious groups in order to bait and catch potential "threats".
We have laws being put in place that restrict people from respecting their religious views (Christian, Muslim, Hindi, or otherwise) because it might offend atheists.
We have regulations put in place so that citizens must answer to businesses, while regulations (or the agencies responsible for the regulations) depleted so that businesses do not have to answer to citizens.
We have raving geniuses (sarcasm alert) publicly posting information that can only do harm. And while I am all for the free exchange of information. Only a complete idiot would think that releasing schematics for a printed gun will not be used to kill innocent people. It is only a matter of time. And by proving something people already knew, all they did was make it easier for people who would normally be too dumb to figure it out to do harm. Knowledge is a responsibility, and should be handled as such.
We have people leaking government information endangering lives, policy, and stability because they feel people should know, or for their own personal gain. Again, knowledge is power, taking that from those who protect us does nothing but prevent them from being able to protect us. Now, if the government, or someone in the government is obviously doing something counter to the nations security or stability, it should be raised up. But not in this crazy partisan banter that seems to snowball.
There are news stories of police shooting children trying to protect the same people they are killing.
We live in a world where Governments have lost control of their own borders. And as a result, they (in the case of the US, and many other countries at the behest of their own citizens and elected officials) are targeting it's own citizens to create a feeling of safety.
And if you think the little things you mentioned are anything near the nightmare that already exists, you are so lost.
With the escalated fear of those who are not us, you have citizens attacking innocent
Thank you, with how many people seem to think that it is the responsibility of the victim to make sure that they are properly protected against idiots, it is nice to hear some sanity.
I personally think 30 months is too short. And the man should have been charged with attempted murder once for every person in each aircraft.
People need to become more conscious of their actions. If you know something "fun" that can kill people, you should still be charged with attempted murder, even if you were too stupid to realize your actions could have resulted in death.
But, you do end up in a grey area of what is a stupid attempt, and what is an honest mistake. However, in this case, it was obviously not a mistake, it was just stupid "fun".
As for his statement that he didn't know it was dangerous only leads to the fact that people are continuously using things without understanding what it is that they use. All laser pointers come with warnings. Even if his friend removed the label before letting his friend use it, the friend should also be responsible for notifying his friend of the dangers.
There is also the fact that this kid was not aware of the fact that it was illegal.
Now I know I am getting old, but the repeated use of the "I didn't know" defense sickens me every time I hear it in the news. What level of stupidity is required for people to do something they have no idea what they are doing?
I have been slowly getting my niece into astronomy, and now I have to deal with keeping up with these idiots causing new laws getting created, so I then have to research them, so that I can continue to teach her how to look at the stars responsibly, and while, it is obvious to keep pointers out of flight paths, now, before going to a new place I need to make sure I am more than 10 miles away from any registered airport.
After reading the article (and at times, it seems that the article is biased one way or the other. A rather interesting read from a technical stand-point). It is in no way commenting on the quality of the Android System or is it truly comparing Android vs Blackberry vs iOS vs Windows 7 (yeah, they list Windows 7 in the research, but it didn't make it to the writers page... Interesting).
The point and reason for the research was to analyze and report on Android as a platform and a supportable system. It identifies key characteristics in the serviceability of the Android (using other systems as a point of reference), and while they believe that the fragmentation (which they believe is the reason for the fact that 14% of all Android calls are hardware vs 7% and 6% of iOS and Blackberry), that factor does not outweigh the positive that such a model brings (pretty much the first paragraph in the report's summary).
Needless to say, with WDS posting it with such a poorly worded title, and the ability for other reviewers to lazily recap the title, and lead-in to the report (ok, they have 1 paragraph to represent a 17 page document, of which they selected to partially represent the hardware fault outline... Partially).
There are also several mis-quotes in the article that are rather telling.
e.g.:
WDS noted in its report. “Deployment by more than 25 OEMs and lower-cost product coming to market is leading to higher than average rates of hardware failures and, in turn, return and repair costs.”
Actual report text (page 4): "Its use exploded and today the OS is deployed by more than 35 OEMs2 , offering an
accessible and customizable platform that has resonated with manufacturers and mobile operators alike."
-- These stats are not even in the report. There is a graph that represents amounts per type of issue, but they do not give hard numbers in the report and w/o the graph, you do not see that the stats are fairly balanced between device with each device having a specific high fault area, except android.
12.6% of all technical support calls related to Android in the study were for hardware failures related to the touchscreen, buttons, speakers, microphones and battery performance. Just 9.3% of Windows Phone, 8% of iOS calls and 5.5% of BlackBerry calls were related to hardware failures.
--
Actual report text (): "While Android deployments may show a higher propensity to hardware failures than rival OS platforms,
analysis of these hardware faults shows no principle defects on the platform; ie: the platform is not
predisposed to one particular hardware defect. Instead, the distribution of hardware faults against
weighted averages deviates by less than 1% in all categories. In this instance, Android actually benefits
from deployment across multiple reference designs and component variants. This means that the brand is
unlikely to be associated with a specific hardware shortcoming."
===
The rest of the article goes on to only quote the press release.
At least that's the way it looks to me...
This case would be a sad state of patent law if this company does win.
While Nintendo may have been made aware of the patent when they applied for the trademark, they had already completed their development of the device before this had happened. This is not a unique situation, just rare. It would appear that the company that wrote the patent did it at the same time (or VERY close) to the announcement of the WiiMote. Which was announced 2 months after the patent was filed At the Tokyo Game Show(See: http://tgs.cesa.or.jp/2005/english/). So, considering the fact that the controller was announced, it would be a fair assumption that they did not start development on the controller within the 60 day window between a filing of a US patent, and announcing their product. Obviously Nintendo will have to prove that was infact the case, but having worked on a patent suit in the past, that part is the easy thing to prove. This whole Trademark red-herring will probably be more of an annoyance then anything.
Also keep in mind, while the patent was filed in 2005, it wasn't published until 2006. There is no way that Nintendo could have known about this product via it's patent until they had completed their development, and started contracts for mass production for their November 2006 release. Considering the 3-5 year R&D cycle on these systems, the timeline with the patent don't line up for an infringement. However, it should give Nintendo an exception to the patent, while still allowing the company to hold it's patent (which may actually be the point of the suit, to prevent Nintendo from being identified as prior art).
On a side note, Nintendo filed their patent in Japan one month before this other company did in the US.
see: http://www19.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/PA1/cgi-bin/PA1DETAIL
Publication name: 2006-331109
Filing date: 26.05.2005
Application Number: 2005-154233
This is something I consider one of the greatest downfalls in current society. The ability to make a point by taking 90% of an idea, and leaving out 10% because it doesn't fit (and yes the 90/10 rule is arbitrary for any of sticklers for detail).
In the case of the author, they literally define faith by stating aspects that people take from scientists, and then proclaim it faith.
Yes, Faith requires Trust.
Yes, Faith requires belief.
However, as my pastor taught me, with question, there is doubt, with doubt, there is no faith. Without faith you will always find fault with God.
And while I do consider myself a God-fearing person, I don't have faith in God, and I can't as long as I see the name of God used in such a way as to take away from someone else.
The point of science is that you question all, trust what can be proven, and believe in what you see. This are the principals of scientific discovery, and for anything to be considered a truth, they must pass these principals, and be confirmed by more then the original observer. Otherwise they are theories. And while it is fun for someone of faith to attack theories, the problem there is that until a theory is proven to be true or false, it is just a theory, and to be taken on believe, and only trusted as far as it can be thrown. It should never be considered on faith. Nothing in the scientific world is taken on faith. And every time a scientist does take something on faith, the community is ready to correct them.
While I don't agree with Sony's practices, and well, they have no idea of how negatively their tactics impact their sales. However, as Sony is not the only company impacted by this. Yesterday was the first time in over a month that I powered up my PS3 to download and install Socom 4 Beta, and well, I was lucky enough to download and install it, I was done after that as I could no longer connect to their network.
So, while I can see why they think it's a great idea by bringing attention to these issues, they really are no different then (and forgive me, but it really is the same) the Tea Party. Young idealistic people who think that they can change the world by running head first at the establishment and thinking it will change. It is counter-productive, and tends to cause the established group to over-compensate.
With SciFi changing it's name to imply they are more than science fiction. Then taking one of the greatest cult classic Science Fiction classics to a prequel that is brooding and dramatic, and neo-social-political rather than anything actually SciFi (other than the occasional scene in the virtual world, which was incredibly like the real world for all intents and purposes, and a quick 5 minute robot scene a season)... Are they trying to convert geeks into socialites, or convince socialites they are geeky???
I mean really, to say that science fiction (which made them one of the greatest channels on cable) is too much of a niche market, they need to be like every other cable channel is kinda sad, and depressing.
It's hard enough that MTV switched to TV shows, and Cartoon Network is going to Live Action... What next, Comedy Central actually getting a Real News Show???
(btw, if that last one actually happens, I will turn off cable for life... and I will know that it is truly the end of the beginning of the end)
Haven is good, it holds a strong character base, the story lines are fairly original while holding to the sort of traditional ghoulies. Sanctuary is up there, and I am glad it's back. Story and characters are all over the place, but it's fun to watch... Eureka is just fun (ok getting a little like heros with it's constant character reset, and the fact that you can tell the writters have NO CLUE what they are doing). Warehouse 13 is Friday the 13th the series re-invented. Probably one of my favorite shows.
Caprica... well, they could have gotten rid of the cylons, and left everything else in, and ran it on USA and nobody would have known or cared... It actually probably would have sold as a show if it was played right after psyched (ok maybe a little too dark for that... after dead zone maybe...)
I haven't tried out the Google device yet. The Apple unit is decent, but it's so focused on TV rental that it makes it difficult to work with an existing library of media; between the transcoding, and tedious menu navigation... well, it's a good thing it's only $99. It's a dang cheap way to get your stuff on your bigger screens, provided you're willing to jump through the necessary hoops.
OK, after reading the article, and practically having a brain spasm from the complete degradation of intelligence, I had to go back and review the initial snippet posted and lets start from there.
First the reviewer (which by the first sentence can't even be considered a reviewer, but rather an Apple Fanboy attempting to get the jump on a story, and spin it their way) hasn't even used the Google device. By that statement alone, they can not say any round has gone to anyone, because they haven't even stepped out of the gate to make a comparison.
Next, they compare the price of a pay for service device to a free to use device. Ok, what's the long term cost comparison? If the first gen google device is 300 dollars, but connects you to free/pay services, what type of costs are you going to incur over the use of the product, and how much would a person have to dish out to the apple device for comparable service?
Next they refer to Google going after source1 or whatever they call it. Now I am a videophile, so I have just a few connections on my TV, and my receiver. With that being said, most are full... But I can say this for certain, there is no first and second connection on either. The AV Ports may have a 1 and a 2, the HDMI ports may have a 1 and a 2, there is also the CbTV/Sat port, and the aux port... They are just monikers. To say that Google is looking to replace the Cable box (which is the mis-informed implication, and by mis-informed, they take a piece of information that may or may not be correct, and turn the direction of it into something that is incorrect to cause the reader to be mis-informed about the actuality of the situation) has nothing to do with the complexity to connect the device. Seriously, who wrote this? A 10 year old child wanting to be accepted for being cool and liking something?
Both devices have their points, and both have their negatives. I have a natural fear for Apples rights and property management, and a natural fear of Googles obsession with personal information. So, I am most likely to go with Google, since it's easier to mask personal information than it is to hack the rights of stuff you spent money on, and suddenly can no longer access (or worse, apple changes formats, than your old stuff becomes dated... again).
There's a lot of libertarians here on Slashdot. Well, this is what a libertarian utopia looks like, kids. If this strikes you as unjust and cruel, you'd probably better stop listening to Glen Beck on the teevee, and start voting for candidates who believe that government is a useful thing.
(If, on the other hand, you're happy with the outcome of this story, that's cool, you're not a hypocrite, and, we can agree to disagree.)
As for "why not put out the fire and then bill him", the $75 fee is not to put out the fire, it's to keep the fire department running when there *isn't* a fire. You can no more pay the bill after you need the service than you can wait until after you get cancer to start paying for medical insurance. The system can't work that way.
Hmm, that's an interesting theory. I should try and take that to the grocery store the next time I go... I wonder if they will not accept my money when I pick out my groceries, because I didn't pay them ahead of time...
Yes, there is a cost associated with putting the fire out. Ideally the fire dept could determine their cost in man-hours and supplies, and bill the family for it... Of course the current situation implies that the family wouldn't pay...
Either way, I only feel bad for the animals in this. The family obviously could afford the 75 dollars, and basic logic implies that one should pay for necessities first, security second, and luxury last, while saving for the future. It would be an easy assumption that this family passed up on #2, so now they need to replace #1. There is a price for everything, and this is no exception.
After having worked in the consumer software industry, I have seen sales and marketing depts. alike try and push their vision of what is happening, but this has to be an all time high for diluted morons.
It's easy to understand how, from a market share and revenue standpoint they want this to be true. But, I am getting so tired of them (yes, the proverbial they) dictating what is going to happen because it benefits them the most...
Well, Good luck Microsoft, hope it benefits you as much as Nintendo benefited from sticking with Carts, and from your backing for HD-DVDs...
Since all Cellphone services support a network update push. The simple answer is yes. There is always the SMS push issues have have crept up as of late, but the most likely exploit will be in the Service Update process. However, to my knowledge no such exploit exists... yet. And of course there is the possibility of an app doing it, but I can't imagine that app developer ever staying out of jail for long. Let alone the app making it into the app store.
There was a story a while back of Toyota attempting to open a plant in the Southern US, but the plans were scrapped when potential employees failed the aptitude tests... And the plant was built in Canada... And we question if it was the drivers or the company... I rarely side with the company, but this time, you have 3 systems that have to all fail in a way that makes it undetectable for failure (I am sure they checked the sensors to verify that they worked, or that adds a 4th system that would have also needed to fail), or a user pressing on the wrong pedal... Now is it the pedal's fault, or the manufacturers that the user can not figure out how to properly use the vehicle? Seriously, that can not be the way that we address every issue. Otherwise we will lose sight of objectivity, and never be able to account for our own actions.
Sad day.
Now that the precedent has been set, the "alternate" meaning of the word will slowly become common place, and in time, we will learn to accept Open Source as a corporate entitlement, granted by us paying them for the rights to use their code... I was wondering how long it would take. Took longer than I expected.
Actually ways is a pluralized singular word taken from an olde English word (1588) wayes. While it is the same as the word way, it does have very specific contexts that it is used in the English language, in both Queens and American English. Most people are just not taught it, and either pick up it's usage through general day to day speech. But either ways, it is just a reference to either the same idea or concept conveyed by it's non-pluralized brother as an adverb or noun.
Common examples are:
sideways - The hat sat on his head sideways.
If you tried the same sentence using the word sideway it just doesn't work...
Always - Not a fair example, but same root, same result. You will never hear someone say alway.
ways - (n) The old man is stuck in his ways.
- (adv) He had a ways to go, but he got there.
While the first sentence may sound correct with way, the proper word is ways. It is not a colloquialism or an idiom, but rather proper speech. The second sentence could be a long way to go, but again, the proper adverb when not using an adjective is ways, not way. Just one of those wonderful bizarre details with the English language. We have too many words for the same meaning, and the context and usage matters. In this case, it's a very old word we just use, and most people no longer realize there is a difference between the usage of ways and way. But, there is, in a very subtle context.
As a noun, it represents an idea of a pluralized singularity. All the ways are his. Whenever you try to summize a multitude into a single context, way becomes ways. Rare, but for some silly reason the context exists.
As an adverb, it again works to pluralize a single context. There are multiple ways for "it" to go. It, being the context of the verb, creates a singular entity to focus the ways upon. I am not aware of any other word that actually operates in that fashion, but I am sure they are out there.
And as far as as I am aware, ways is only used like this as an adverb or noun. At no other time can you create a context that can contain this odd scenario... But then again, I am not really that knowledgeable about the English language...
I am glad I heard that Devo is back to sing play out the end of days. While I agree that things will probably get twisted, I would like to see higher band-widths available to the general public. The general demoralizing and insulting response to something the government is *trying* to improve is funny. It's like kids getting upset with their parents promising a pony for a birthday. Instead of being happy at the COMPLETELY ridiculous gift, the insults and concerns of: well, if I even get the pony, who is going to feed it, where is it going to stay, my parents aren't even going to give me time to play with it, it will probably kick me, nobody else is going to get a pony, I already bought my own pony...
Lighten up people, you will have enough time to complain when things fail.
Targeted test, towards a targeted response. My wife and I get in this discussion all the time. I prefer to watch TV, play with my cats, and work/play on my computer at the same time. I typically work best like this. The key is, as people have mentioned, multitasking is very much like a computer. Each device/sense/ability are only capable of one process at a time, however, typing, breathing, sitting upright, listening to music, do not conflict with each other. If I were to add in anything that took away from one of the others, I would be unable to maintain.
The above test measured the wrong information. It was looking for cognitive multitasking. I seriously doubt it is possible for a human to cognitively multitask. We can hear and parse multiple conversations (I would have no idea of how many the average person can handle, but I peak out at about 3, and I am not very good at it), but we can only maintain one conscience stream of data at a time. This means, you have a conversation with someone, you may be able to keep track of what someone else is saying, but you are not likely, and definitely not proficiently going to be able to carry out a conversation with another. You may be able to hear what they say (one of the ways we can switch conversations and topics in conversation, the above mentioned ability to parse multiple conversations). But each time you switch between conversation, you have to break your stream of thought, interject the new conversation, and carry on with it. Then you switch back, but it's not multitasking, it's more in line with serial processing.
So, can people multitask, you have to, in order to function. But, to what level, and how do you do it is a different question (or 2).
Personally, I will listen to music, or watch TV while programing because it helps me focus on programming. It gives me a constant stream of data to keep my other senses busy while I focus my train of thought on what I am writing/designing. However, when the wife stops in, and sees me doing this, and deciding I can handle a conversation everything goes south, and a fight will typically break out.
Of course 1+1=1. Schrödinger only had one cat in the box. 1 living cat + 1 dead cat = 1 cat.
I need that on a shirt:)
GEEKWARE FOR ALL!