I find it interesting, though, that Google works by generating the searches ahead of time and storing them. I would think that space would be a killer (especially for the common words, eg, car), but that's why I'm not in the search engine biz.
Does explain why Google can't handle words with symbols or numbers with decimals very well, though.
The attention crisis is becoming so severe that people will have to be paid to receive information. Davenport and Beck suggest this is, to some degree, inevitable.
I assume my check from Slashdot for receiving its information is in the mail, then?
(waits for inevitable "You're saying Slashdot is informative?" posts to follow)
Microsoft, the big ol' international company that markets Visual Studio in about 60 different languages, much less Windows, much less Internet Explorer..._this_ is the Microsoft that's pulling SmartTags in Europe because of language issues?
Excuse me if I don't think that's quite the reason.
"How does a hand-grenade explosion a few feet away from you motivate you if you've just been marching 16 hours in tremendous heat?" asked Dr. Barry G. Silverman, an engineering professor at the University of Pennsylvania.
Altogether now..."Duh."
I find the applications of this to be pretty fascinating, though. I play a lot of games, and they're all pretty flat. Even Deus Ex, which was touted as being the one of the most immersive to date, was paper-thin once you realized how the scripts were structured. But when this sort of technology finds its way to the private sector, you could start seeing characters in games that really do react to what you do, instead of just the few possibilities the programmers put in.
So when Microsoft gets into this biz, will their motto change to, "We know where you went today"?
No, seriously, why did it take the USGS to do this? I mean, if I reported a loss to my insurance company, I'd get someone coming out to verify it. The insurance company doesn't just take my word for it. Of course, I'm not a big business, but still...
I hear that Red Hat is going to be giving away their software pretty soon. I don't believe it, myself, because, hey, once you start giving away your software, how are you ever going to make money?
In the scene where you first see Han Solo, he's sitting in the cantina having a drink. The bounty hunter (Greebo) joins him, and they have a chitchat, where Greebo threatens Han, yadda yadda.
In the original version, Han makes some plithy comment, and then shoots Greebo under the table.
In the re-released version, they added in Greebo shooting at Han first (and missing, despite being all of two feet away), and then Han shooting back in self-defence.
How does this change the storyline? Dunno. But it really does change the nature of Han that's presented.
6 hours of additional material, and 7 additional scenes?
So we're obviously not talking about 6 hours of additional _movie_ material (like, say, exposition or the like). We're talking maybe half an hour to an hour of deleted scenes and then five hours of...what?
The mind boggles at the thought. Five hours of interviews? Five hours of Lucas explaining how Jar-Jar really is a good idea? Five hours of explaining how the digital scenes were worked on, instead of a script? I'm really quite curious.
And in other breaking news today, the latest web server, Foo, has found to blow away Tux, Apache, and IIS in terms of speed.
Although the initial install is slow -- as the entire Internet gets downloaded to your hard drive -- after that, nothing else even comes close in terms of performance.
We found that the software application's architecture determines speed results much more than the operating system on which it runs.
Wow. Thank God we have confirmation of the blindingly obvious. And here I thought that my bloated, poorly written, buggy network application would just magically work wonders if I put it on RH Linux.
I remember when kids would make prank calls to random numbers in the telephone book. But that's old fashioned now. Now, you make a virus that makes prank calls to random numbers in the telephone book.
It looks like Amazon already patented using databases to hold examples of prior art, and Rambus has, actually, already patented the U.S. Patent Office.
I envision many IP lawsuits for this story as a result.
1: Java is easier for a beginner to understand than C++.
2: C++ is more powerful than Java.
Now, with that said, Java as an educational language is a great idea -- in the beginning. In the beginning, you want a language that is easy to teach and, most of all, readable. Really, in my mind, teaching people about memory allocation and garbage management to people who still might be having trouble with references and indirection and double indirection is a waste of time. Java hides the complexity of the details, so that people can actually learn to design and think logically before they have to worry about more pragmatic concerns. After all, programming isn't about languages: it's about theory. Once you understand the theory behind a concept (be it classes, references, pointers, garbage collection, whatever), everything else is just keywords and syntax.
So I got to say: I would go ahead and teach the AP students Java. It's more likely to be useful to more of them than C++. And even if it isn't, the practice of good design skills will still carry over to whatever language(s) you learn in college/work. Sure, you can make the argument that Java hides a lot of stuff from the user, but the purpose of a CS course, in my mind, isn't to teach students about 'this' language or 'that' platform: it's to teach them about programming and computers in general. You want to show them everything under the hood? Don't teach them C, teach them assembler.
For the CS students, though, I think the question is kind of redundant: you don't learn one or the other, you learn both (and assembler, to boot). But I think a CS degree is a lot different from a CS AP class.
Or, at least, I hope it won't. US Corporations would want this ratified so that they could go after patent-breakers in other countries, but how will they feel when other countries' governments go after them? That'll end it sooner than you can say "capitalism".
Why don't the cable companies simply _ask_ the viewer if they want targeted ads or not? You could put a button on the cablebox: if it's pressed, then the cable company collects viewing information and starts showing appropriate ads. If it's not pressed, then they don't.
The people who don't mind targeted ads would get them, the people who don't, wouldn't.
(Of course, this would require the cable companies and advertisers to be honest, but it's still better than them just forcing targeted ads down your throat.)
[T]he jumbo-sized plasma monitor is aimed to meet the growing demand coming from the business and educational sectors
And you thought schools would have a hard time keeping their computers from walking away...
Dan Gillmor says: It was overhaul time last weekend at MSN Communities, the message-board area of the Microsoft Network. The online forums disappeared from the Web for more than a day and then resurfaced with a somewhat different look and feel, annoying many of the volunteers who run the forums.
As opposed to when any other web site changes it's layout? People deal with this all the time. If slashdot were to change it's layout, you'd have to suck it up and deal. No one would be screaming anything about ASPs.
If the company you bought that widget from decides to no longer support widgets...well, nothing you can do about it. Still nothing to do with ASPs. We deal with stuff like this everyday.
Another quote: In this context, you can see that the entertainment industry's savage war against Napster and other file-sharing products is more than just opposition to unauthorized copying. It's an attack on technology itself -- on hardware and/or software that gives power to people at the network's edges.
Danny seems to have forgotten that Napster required you to upgrade to the newest version to connect to their servers, and Napster was, in the end, a service provider.
Bringing these ideas regarding HailStorm, or ASPs in general, is a valid point, but I think it's horribly muted out by the sheer noise in the article.
It's the _expectation_ of privacy. (Most) people understand sight - you put them in a situation, and they immediately understand where they can be seen, where they can't, etc; they 'know' where they are private to do what they want. Ditto with hearing. If I'm in an area where I can't be seen by the human eye, and I can't be heard by the human ear, I have a certain expectation that that area is private. (Most) people do not worry about infrared signatures, parabolic hearing devices, or the like, and so use of those tends to violate the expectation people have to privacy.
You're referring to the same Justice Scalia who thinks that the police can conduct unreasonable and pointless arrests for fine-only misdemeanors, such as driving without a seatbelt, right?
The man has some good rulings, but over the long term, I don't think I'd rejoice if another one of him was put on the court...
Slashdot Mirror
And let's not forget the on-site masseuses.
Where do I sign up?
I find it interesting, though, that Google works by generating the searches ahead of time and storing them. I would think that space would be a killer (especially for the common words, eg, car), but that's why I'm not in the search engine biz.
Does explain why Google can't handle words with symbols or numbers with decimals very well, though.
Pop-up ads annoy the hell out of a lot of online users, but they're impossible to ignore
...until you learn to run a filtering proxy such as Junkbusters or Proxomitron
The attention crisis is becoming so severe that people will have to be paid to receive information. Davenport and Beck suggest this is, to some degree, inevitable.
I assume my check from Slashdot for receiving its information is in the mail, then?
(waits for inevitable "You're saying Slashdot is informative?" posts to follow)
Microsoft, the big ol' international company that markets Visual Studio in about 60 different languages, much less Windows, much less Internet Explorer..._this_ is the Microsoft that's pulling SmartTags in Europe because of language issues?
Excuse me if I don't think that's quite the reason.
"How does a hand-grenade explosion a few feet away from you motivate you if you've just been marching 16 hours in tremendous heat?" asked Dr. Barry G. Silverman, an engineering professor at the University of Pennsylvania.
Altogether now..."Duh."
I find the applications of this to be pretty fascinating, though. I play a lot of games, and they're all pretty flat. Even Deus Ex, which was touted as being the one of the most immersive to date, was paper-thin once you realized how the scripts were structured. But when this sort of technology finds its way to the private sector, you could start seeing characters in games that really do react to what you do, instead of just the few possibilities the programmers put in.
So when Microsoft gets into this biz, will their motto change to, "We know where you went today"?
No, seriously, why did it take the USGS to do this? I mean, if I reported a loss to my insurance company, I'd get someone coming out to verify it. The insurance company doesn't just take my word for it. Of course, I'm not a big business, but still...
I hear that Red Hat is going to be giving away their software pretty soon. I don't believe it, myself, because, hey, once you start giving away your software, how are you ever going to make money?
You didn't hear the hoopla?
In the scene where you first see Han Solo, he's sitting in the cantina having a drink. The bounty hunter (Greebo) joins him, and they have a chitchat, where Greebo threatens Han, yadda yadda.
In the original version, Han makes some plithy comment, and then shoots Greebo under the table.
In the re-released version, they added in Greebo shooting at Han first (and missing, despite being all of two feet away), and then Han shooting back in self-defence.
How does this change the storyline? Dunno. But it really does change the nature of Han that's presented.
6 hours of additional material, and 7 additional scenes?
So we're obviously not talking about 6 hours of additional _movie_ material (like, say, exposition or the like). We're talking maybe half an hour to an hour of deleted scenes and then five hours of...what?
The mind boggles at the thought. Five hours of interviews? Five hours of Lucas explaining how Jar-Jar really is a good idea? Five hours of explaining how the digital scenes were worked on, instead of a script? I'm really quite curious.
And in other breaking news today, the latest web server, Foo, has found to blow away Tux, Apache, and IIS in terms of speed.
Although the initial install is slow -- as the entire Internet gets downloaded to your hard drive -- after that, nothing else even comes close in terms of performance.
Hrmm. You wouldn't, by any chance, _work_ for a domain name registrar, would you?
Nah. Couldn't be.
At one point, it was to work hard, earn a fair amount of money, and then retire.
Then it was to join a rising tech company, work for a little bit, sell your shares after the IPO, and retire.
Now, it's to trademark a name that someone with big pockets, and lawyers who can't do research, will pay you gobs of money for, and retire.
We found that the software application's architecture determines speed results much more than the operating system on which it runs.
Wow. Thank God we have confirmation of the blindingly obvious. And here I thought that my bloated, poorly written, buggy network application would just magically work wonders if I put it on RH Linux.
I remember when kids would make prank calls to random numbers in the telephone book. But that's old fashioned now. Now, you make a virus that makes prank calls to random numbers in the telephone book.
This is called progress. =P
It looks like Amazon already patented using databases to hold examples of prior art, and Rambus has, actually, already patented the U.S. Patent Office.
I envision many IP lawsuits for this story as a result.
Ok. Let's just get this out of the way:
1: Java is easier for a beginner to understand than C++.
2: C++ is more powerful than Java.
Now, with that said, Java as an educational language is a great idea -- in the beginning. In the beginning, you want a language that is easy to teach and, most of all, readable. Really, in my mind, teaching people about memory allocation and garbage management to people who still might be having trouble with references and indirection and double indirection is a waste of time. Java hides the complexity of the details, so that people can actually learn to design and think logically before they have to worry about more pragmatic concerns. After all, programming isn't about languages: it's about theory. Once you understand the theory behind a concept (be it classes, references, pointers, garbage collection, whatever), everything else is just keywords and syntax.
So I got to say: I would go ahead and teach the AP students Java. It's more likely to be useful to more of them than C++. And even if it isn't, the practice of good design skills will still carry over to whatever language(s) you learn in college/work. Sure, you can make the argument that Java hides a lot of stuff from the user, but the purpose of a CS course, in my mind, isn't to teach students about 'this' language or 'that' platform: it's to teach them about programming and computers in general. You want to show them everything under the hood? Don't teach them C, teach them assembler.
For the CS students, though, I think the question is kind of redundant: you don't learn one or the other, you learn both (and assembler, to boot). But I think a CS degree is a lot different from a CS AP class.
I didn't actually _mean_ it; "Screw the French" was just a Monty Python-esque battle cry from a few years back. Seemed appropriate.
Or, at least, I hope it won't. US Corporations would want this ratified so that they could go after patent-breakers in other countries, but how will they feel when other countries' governments go after them? That'll end it sooner than you can say "capitalism".
Why don't the cable companies simply _ask_ the viewer if they want targeted ads or not? You could put a button on the cablebox: if it's pressed, then the cable company collects viewing information and starts showing appropriate ads. If it's not pressed, then they don't.
The people who don't mind targeted ads would get them, the people who don't, wouldn't.
(Of course, this would require the cable companies and advertisers to be honest, but it's still better than them just forcing targeted ads down your throat.)
[T]he jumbo-sized plasma monitor is aimed to meet the growing demand coming from the business and educational sectors And you thought schools would have a hard time keeping their computers from walking away...
Dan Gillmor says:
It was overhaul time last weekend at MSN Communities, the message-board area of the Microsoft Network. The online forums disappeared from the Web for more than a day and then resurfaced with a somewhat different look and feel, annoying many of the volunteers who run the forums.
As opposed to when any other web site changes it's layout? People deal with this all the time. If slashdot were to change it's layout, you'd have to suck it up and deal. No one would be screaming anything about ASPs.
If the company you bought that widget from decides to no longer support widgets...well, nothing you can do about it. Still nothing to do with ASPs. We deal with stuff like this everyday.
Another quote: In this context, you can see that the entertainment industry's savage war against Napster and other file-sharing products is more than just opposition to unauthorized copying. It's an attack on technology itself -- on hardware and/or software that gives power to people at the network's edges.
Danny seems to have forgotten that Napster required you to upgrade to the newest version to connect to their servers, and Napster was, in the end, a service provider.
Bringing these ideas regarding HailStorm, or ASPs in general, is a valid point, but I think it's horribly muted out by the sheer noise in the article.
This gets +4?
If a cop stands next to me and listens to me talk to someone on the telephone, does this violate my rights under the 4th Amendment? Of course not.
Yet if he uses a wiretap device to listen to my communications, which is, after all, just another form of listening, it does. Discuss.
It's the _expectation_ of privacy. (Most) people understand sight - you put them in a situation, and they immediately understand where they can be seen, where they can't, etc; they 'know' where they are private to do what they want. Ditto with hearing. If I'm in an area where I can't be seen by the human eye, and I can't be heard by the human ear, I have a certain expectation that that area is private. (Most) people do not worry about infrared signatures, parabolic hearing devices, or the like, and so use of those tends to violate the expectation people have to privacy.
It's shocking because Scalia doesn't exactly have the best record for being against such government intrusions.
You're referring to the same Justice Scalia who thinks that the police can conduct unreasonable and pointless arrests for fine-only misdemeanors, such as driving without a seatbelt, right?
The man has some good rulings, but over the long term, I don't think I'd rejoice if another one of him was put on the court...