-A full sized Android tablet with all the features of the Galaxy Tab. iPad size is perfect.
-HDMI out for anything the built-in screen displays.
-USB that allows me to painlessly upload photos from a camera or card reader.
-***Wifi that will work with Nikon and Canon camera Wifi and Eye-Fi cards - to shoot straight to the tablet.***
-A gorgeous fingerprint resistant screen, NOT GLOSSY, with lots of pixels, WXGA would be nice, WUXGA would be awesome.
-Multi-Touch interface that's a pleasure to use.
-6 hours of battery life is plenty, just include a power cord that's not so darn short.
-A full sized Android tablet with all the features of the Galaxy Tab. iPad size is perfect.
-HDMI out for anything the built-in screen displays.
-USB that allows me to painlessly upload photos from a camera or card reader.
-***Wifi that will work with Nikon and Canon camera Wifi and Eye-Fi cards - to shoot straight to the tablet.***
-A gorgeous fingerprint resistant screen, NOT GLOSSY, with lots of pixels, WXGA would be nice, WUXGA would be awesome.
-Multi-Touch interface that's a pleasure to use.
-6 hours of battery life is plenty, just include a power cord that's not so darn short.
My mood does not reflect the list of things that I need to get done.
When I can ask my phone, just by talking into it, to schedule a meeting, invite certain people, then comb the news to see if traffic will a be worry tonight, and also send my wife a text message apologizing for being late, then report back when it's done, THEN I'll have a digital assistant. Software has barely tapped the ability to serve us with the input we're already giving it. Adding bio-sensor input and "mood detection" now is just a bell/whistle that isn't helpful to me. It's helpful to so many sales channels of which I am the target.
Now if we had these "real digital assistants" then mood awareness would be a true achievement. The text apology to my wife would make her smile lovingly while shedding a single tear.
But seriously, Intel should invest it's billions more into software. Fuel real demand for hardware rather than pimping out yet more bells and whistles.
I guess medical and fitness uses will be pretty advantageous.
Not so. At the very least, a 5 digit user ID shows that about 12 years ago, the low digit poster was not (let's say) 8 years old or younger. Or if they were that young, they should probably get the +1 because even if they're wrong it's worth thinking about.
It's really too bad that might be the only valid Wisdom bonus here. I offer my Karma bonus as evidence.
"It will be able to capture an image with 1/100th the light intensity required by a DSLR"
I'm reading that as ultra fast shutter speeds being available for fast moving photography. Cool.
He's not talking at all about how fast the shutter is mechanically able to peform, 1/4000 or 1/8000. Setting your shutter on 1/4000 isn't the issue. It's having enough light to get a good exposure at 1/4000. What he's talking about is shooting at 1/100th a normal (by current standards) ISO. The sensor is 100x more sensitive to light.
This makes higher shutter speeds available, because the photo won't be dark at 1/2000. Or in other words, f/8, 1/7000th of second, ISO 320,000 for freezing those hummingbird wings flitting about in the shadow of the dim pre-dawn light.
Burning Man itself has kinda become mainstream. It's less about art and free love and the like, and more about college guys getting drunk/stoned and harassing girls, trying to get them to strip. .
Except for your choice of the exceptionally strong word "harass", I think this might be a good thing. Having participated in my fair share of naked hippie art and body festivals I can almost assure you that, sadly, with few exceptions the girls who don't need to be talked into it are the last girls on earth anyone wants to see naked.
Zoidberg aside, this IS great news. Despite the "free from government" leanings here on slashdot, because of the way the market and the legal system works (despite our ideals), this is great news.
It's regulations like this that keep free markets free.
You're arguing semantics. If I can think someone suffers from prostate cancer and not be prejudiced against them, then I can also think they suffer from religion and be tolerant and accepting of them. I'm talking about the thing, not the person.
You know, it is possible to scorn religion without scorning the religious.
Let's step away from religion for a moment. I can't STAND strong accents that to me sound like they're spoken by illiterates. "Ebonics" (Let me axs ya a kestun), Boston folks who can't pronounce Rs, southern drawls. Makes me wonder if these people never had a TV to teach them how to talk.
But I know we're all a product of our environment and also more than than sum of our parts. I may think you talk like a goofball. But I'm judging the way you sound. Not YOU personally.
Same for religion. You can bash irrational beliefs in magic sky dictators, while still loving and befriending the people who suffer under such beliefs. That's why they call it "tolerance" and not "blind acceptance".
In summary, it's rational to bash a belief, while not bashing the believer.
"This really excites me, it implies, that there existed conditions in our very own universe where at some point we had faster than light travel....if it happened once, its bound to be discovered "how" and potentially exploited to achieve FTL."
If I understand it at all correctly (maybe not?), nothing ever traveled faster than the speed of light.
It's just that the speed of light was much faster shortly after the big bang. Since then, the nature of the universe has changed, and the speed of light with it. I don't think there are any FTL tricks to be found there. Someone can hopefully correct me if I'm wrong.
It's not ""because you don't understand my field of expertise, you must be an idiot."
It's "Because you reject my expertise and science in general that you must be an idiot." Which, let's face it, is pretty fair.
If *real* lawyers came on here and started laying the smack down we might think it rude. But we wouldn't reject their input.
We wouldn't say, "Go away, we don't want to believe you." "We don't trust you." Or "Go away strange law geek and stop asking me to think."
Scientists could be better at communicating but it's not better "teaching" that most adults are looking for. It's coddling.
"The only way they can tell if you watch it is if you are selected for a Nelson survey. And that's why"
That I think, is the root cause of why TV is generally so terrible. Busy interesting people don't have time for Nielsen surveys. People good at math realize that the time and effort spent will yield about the same results as voting. People who love really good mysteries (or insert your favorite type of show) likely have nothing to watch and comment on during the time of the survey. Really, imagine all the people who actually take part in the Nielsen ratings getting together for a BBQ. Would you attend?
Then a hemilogue either happens at the theater, or when you overhear somebody talking to themselves. When you overhear somebody talking on their cell phone that's half a dialogue.
But half a dialogue can't be a monologue. How about semilogue?
From Darth Vader to Gargamel we are taught that criminals are ugly.
From Steve McQueen and Charlie's Angels to Brad Pitt and Jessica Alba we're taught that the "good guys" are attractive.
Actually it goes much farther back than that. How about Hercules versus Medusa? Or Ulysses vs. The Cyclops?
This news is so old it was first written on cave walls.
You don't have to lock-out the user from changing those defaults, accessing the full capabilities of the device, or re-purposing the device entirely
Seriously, have you ever dealt with users?
Ever try to use your corporate laptop for "personal use"? My wife's laptop is far more locked down than any iPhone. Her company has gone totally off the deep end with "security" and limiting it's users in order to save IT support dollars and satisfy the legal team. Oh no! Jpegs of your kids might be part of a corporate espionage plot! (Meanwhile the mail, garbage, fax machines, and telephones are totally unsecured).
It always amazes me how the slashdot crowd wants everything for sale to be totally open and configurable, but when it comes to their own IT shop at company X they see no problem requiring Get Smart types of security and locking things down to the point of suggesting TWO laptops for everyone, one company, one personal.
Is there no happy medium? At least my iPhone does the things I want it to do and nobody has suggested I carry 2 devices.
I'm guessing what happens in cases like this is they throw the original design analysis in the trash after realizing that 2-legs will generate a lot more seed money from commercial investors.
-hint- Just wait until the hot stove is spending billions of dollars trying to burn your kids while your teaching exercise takes about 16 years of constant vigilance, needless battles, and resentment. Unless maybe your little one is a Vulcan or something. Until you have your own, just STFU about parenting. Trust me on that.
"So if you figured out a system that worked by yourself...how does this legislation help you in any way?"
Because he doesn't live in a world by himself. It's simple, it keeps his kid from being taken there by a friend's mom because of the toys and playground, by the soccer coach after practice once a week, and 5 other kids who have birthdays. It keeps the kids from pestering grandma who knows about your rule but thinks "special treats" are ok sometimes. Or maybe it helps granddad who just doesn't feel like battling it out with them the one time he sees them this month.
It also prevents his kid from feeling left out when everybody at school is talking about the new happy meal and playing with the toys. It helps keep dad from being the bad guy in the future, because you know, after a few more million dollars of marketing are pumped at them, or maybe just the right toys, the kids will be hollering for them again sometime in the future. If not next week, then next month. Because the battle against the billion dollars of advertising aimed squarely at our kids goes on and on until they leave the house.
But you'd know all that if you had kids of your own.
Any marketing done to small children is taking advantage. Marketing makes parenthood a terrible battle. Even if your kid never watches anything but commercial-free PBS at home and you never ever take him to eat fast food, he's not always at home. The team goes to McDonalds after soccer practice. Grandma lets him watch Disney with all the commercials for COOL stuff! Little Timmy's mom brings Happy Meals home when Timmy has friends over. The kids bring the toys to school and your kid has to say "Oh I'm not allowed to eat there" and everyone makes fun of him. He's 6. He doesn't really understand. All he knows is that Mommy and Daddy won't let him go to the fun place and all the kids tease him for it. "Oh why not Daddy?!? Ice cream is a special treat? Why not McDonald's?" UGH!
Marketing to children 0-16 should be ILLEGAL. Period. It NEVER coincides with good parenting. Why on earth should I have to battle hundreds of millions of dollars aimed squarely at my little kids?
I love this law. I wish more idiotic parenting and sinister marketing would be made illegal so I wouldn't have to choose between isolating my kids or being at war with the huge marketing budgets and all the idiotic parents who make idiotic behavior "normal".
"Maybe in order to understand Mankind, we have to look at the word
itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words -
"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean ? It's a mystery, and that's
why so is mankind."
Slashdot Mirror
Here's what I'm waiting for:
-A full sized Android tablet with all the features of the Galaxy Tab. iPad size is perfect.
-HDMI out for anything the built-in screen displays.
-USB that allows me to painlessly upload photos from a camera or card reader.
-***Wifi that will work with Nikon and Canon camera Wifi and Eye-Fi cards - to shoot straight to the tablet.***
-A gorgeous fingerprint resistant screen, NOT GLOSSY, with lots of pixels, WXGA would be nice, WUXGA would be awesome.
-Multi-Touch interface that's a pleasure to use.
-6 hours of battery life is plenty, just include a power cord that's not so darn short.
How long do I have to wait?
Stupid slashdot. Right comment. Wrong article.
Here's what I'm waiting for:
-A full sized Android tablet with all the features of the Galaxy Tab. iPad size is perfect.
-HDMI out for anything the built-in screen displays.
-USB that allows me to painlessly upload photos from a camera or card reader.
-***Wifi that will work with Nikon and Canon camera Wifi and Eye-Fi cards - to shoot straight to the tablet.***
-A gorgeous fingerprint resistant screen, NOT GLOSSY, with lots of pixels, WXGA would be nice, WUXGA would be awesome.
-Multi-Touch interface that's a pleasure to use.
-6 hours of battery life is plenty, just include a power cord that's not so darn short.
How long do I have to wait?
My mood does not reflect the list of things that I need to get done.
When I can ask my phone, just by talking into it, to schedule a meeting, invite certain people, then comb the news to see if traffic will a be worry tonight, and also send my wife a text message apologizing for being late, then report back when it's done, THEN I'll have a digital assistant. Software has barely tapped the ability to serve us with the input we're already giving it. Adding bio-sensor input and "mood detection" now is just a bell/whistle that isn't helpful to me. It's helpful to so many sales channels of which I am the target.
Now if we had these "real digital assistants" then mood awareness would be a true achievement. The text apology to my wife would make her smile lovingly while shedding a single tear.
But seriously, Intel should invest it's billions more into software. Fuel real demand for hardware rather than pimping out yet more bells and whistles.
I guess medical and fitness uses will be pretty advantageous.
Mod up please.
My UID is nearly twice your own, yet I have the same karma bonus. That greatly weakens or destroys your evidence there.
No, it perfectly reinforces my point that karma as a bonus is fairly worthless, as opposed to say, something like a bias bonus for a 5 digit user ID.
I thought it was obvious that I was offering my karma bonus as ironic evidence that mod bonuses are pretty lame.
Of course these are all generalizations, as your list of "exceptions" illustrates.
Not so. At the very least, a 5 digit user ID shows that about 12 years ago, the low digit poster was not (let's say) 8 years old or younger. Or if they were that young, they should probably get the +1 because even if they're wrong it's worth thinking about.
It's really too bad that might be the only valid Wisdom bonus here. I offer my Karma bonus as evidence.
"It will be able to capture an image with 1/100th the light intensity required by a DSLR"
I'm reading that as ultra fast shutter speeds being available for fast moving photography. Cool.
He's not talking at all about how fast the shutter is mechanically able to peform, 1/4000 or 1/8000. Setting your shutter on 1/4000 isn't the issue. It's having enough light to get a good exposure at 1/4000. What he's talking about is shooting at 1/100th a normal (by current standards) ISO. The sensor is 100x more sensitive to light.
This makes higher shutter speeds available, because the photo won't be dark at 1/2000. Or in other words, f/8, 1/7000th of second, ISO 320,000 for freezing those hummingbird wings flitting about in the shadow of the dim pre-dawn light.
Burning Man itself has kinda become mainstream. It's less about art and free love and the like, and more about college guys getting drunk/stoned and harassing girls, trying to get them to strip. .
Except for your choice of the exceptionally strong word "harass", I think this might be a good thing. Having participated in my fair share of naked hippie art and body festivals I can almost assure you that, sadly, with few exceptions the girls who don't need to be talked into it are the last girls on earth anyone wants to see naked.
Zoidberg aside, this IS great news. Despite the "free from government" leanings here on slashdot, because of the way the market and the legal system works (despite our ideals), this is great news.
It's regulations like this that keep free markets free.
You're arguing semantics. If I can think someone suffers from prostate cancer and not be prejudiced against them, then I can also think they suffer from religion and be tolerant and accepting of them. I'm talking about the thing, not the person.
You know, it is possible to scorn religion without scorning the religious.
Let's step away from religion for a moment. I can't STAND strong accents that to me sound like they're spoken by illiterates. "Ebonics" (Let me axs ya a kestun), Boston folks who can't pronounce Rs, southern drawls. Makes me wonder if these people never had a TV to teach them how to talk.
But I know we're all a product of our environment and also more than than sum of our parts. I may think you talk like a goofball. But I'm judging the way you sound. Not YOU personally.
Same for religion. You can bash irrational beliefs in magic sky dictators, while still loving and befriending the people who suffer under such beliefs. That's why they call it "tolerance" and not "blind acceptance".
In summary, it's rational to bash a belief, while not bashing the believer.
"This really excites me, it implies, that there existed conditions in our very own universe where at some point we had faster than light travel. ...if it happened once, its bound to be discovered "how" and potentially exploited to achieve FTL."
If I understand it at all correctly (maybe not?), nothing ever traveled faster than the speed of light.
It's just that the speed of light was much faster shortly after the big bang.
Since then, the nature of the universe has changed, and the speed of light with it.
I don't think there are any FTL tricks to be found there. Someone can hopefully correct me if I'm wrong.
It's not ""because you don't understand my field of expertise, you must be an idiot."
It's "Because you reject my expertise and science in general that you must be an idiot." Which, let's face it, is pretty fair.
If *real* lawyers came on here and started laying the smack down we might think it rude. But we wouldn't reject their input.
We wouldn't say, "Go away, we don't want to believe you." "We don't trust you." Or "Go away strange law geek and stop asking me to think."
Scientists could be better at communicating but it's not better "teaching" that most adults are looking for. It's coddling.
+5 well done.
"The only way they can tell if you watch it is if you are selected for a Nelson survey. And that's why"
That I think, is the root cause of why TV is generally so terrible.
Busy interesting people don't have time for Nielsen surveys. People good at math realize that the time and effort spent will yield about the same results as voting. People who love really good mysteries (or insert your favorite type of show) likely have nothing to watch and comment on during the time of the survey. Really, imagine all the people who actually take part in the Nielsen ratings getting together for a BBQ.
Would you attend?
>Surely half a monologue is a hemilogue?
Then a hemilogue either happens at the theater, or when you overhear somebody talking to themselves.
When you overhear somebody talking on their cell phone that's half a dialogue.
But half a dialogue can't be a monologue. How about semilogue?
Seriously? You mods are leaving this unmoderated? This is the most pertinent fucking comment in the list.
From Darth Vader to Gargamel we are taught that criminals are ugly.
From Steve McQueen and Charlie's Angels to Brad Pitt and Jessica Alba we're taught that the "good guys" are attractive.
Actually it goes much farther back than that. How about Hercules versus Medusa? Or Ulysses vs. The Cyclops?
This news is so old it was first written on cave walls.
You don't have to lock-out the user from changing those defaults, accessing the full capabilities of the device, or re-purposing the device entirely
Seriously, have you ever dealt with users?
Ever try to use your corporate laptop for "personal use"? My wife's laptop is far more locked down than any iPhone. Her company has gone totally off the deep end with "security" and limiting it's users in order to save IT support dollars and satisfy the legal team. Oh no! Jpegs of your kids might be part of a corporate espionage plot! (Meanwhile the mail, garbage, fax machines, and telephones are totally unsecured).
It always amazes me how the slashdot crowd wants everything for sale to be totally open and configurable, but when it comes to their own IT shop at company X they see no problem requiring Get Smart types of security and locking things down to the point of suggesting TWO laptops for everyone, one company, one personal.
Is there no happy medium? At least my iPhone does the things I want it to do and nobody has suggested I carry 2 devices.
I'm guessing what happens in cases like this is they throw the original design analysis in the trash after realizing that 2-legs will generate a lot more seed money from commercial investors.
Let me know how that works out for you.
-hint- Just wait until the hot stove is spending billions of dollars trying to burn your kids while your teaching exercise takes about 16 years of constant vigilance, needless battles, and resentment. Unless maybe your little one is a Vulcan or something.
Until you have your own, just STFU about parenting. Trust me on that.
"So if you figured out a system that worked by yourself...how does this legislation help you in any way?"
Because he doesn't live in a world by himself. It's simple, it keeps his kid from being taken there by a friend's mom because of the toys and playground, by the soccer coach after practice once a week, and 5 other kids who have birthdays.
It keeps the kids from pestering grandma who knows about your rule but thinks "special treats" are ok sometimes. Or maybe it helps granddad who just doesn't feel like battling it out with them the one time he sees them this month.
It also prevents his kid from feeling left out when everybody at school is talking about the new happy meal and playing with the toys. It helps keep dad from being the bad guy in the future, because you know, after a few more million dollars of marketing are pumped at them, or maybe just the right toys, the kids will be hollering for them again sometime in the future. If not next week, then next month. Because the battle against the billion dollars of advertising aimed squarely at our kids goes on and on until they leave the house.
But you'd know all that if you had kids of your own.
Any marketing done to small children is taking advantage.
Marketing makes parenthood a terrible battle.
Even if your kid never watches anything but commercial-free PBS at home and you never ever take him to eat fast food, he's not always at home. The team goes to McDonalds after soccer practice. Grandma lets him watch Disney with all the commercials for COOL stuff! Little Timmy's mom brings Happy Meals home when Timmy has friends over. The kids bring the toys to school and your kid has to say "Oh I'm not allowed to eat there" and everyone makes fun of him. He's 6. He doesn't really understand. All he knows is that Mommy and Daddy won't let him go to the fun place and all the kids tease him for it. "Oh why not Daddy?!? Ice cream is a special treat? Why not McDonald's?" UGH!
Marketing to children 0-16 should be ILLEGAL. Period. It NEVER coincides with good parenting. Why on earth should I have to battle hundreds of millions of dollars aimed squarely at my little kids?
I love this law. I wish more idiotic parenting and sinister marketing would be made illegal so I wouldn't have to choose between isolating my kids or being at war with the huge marketing budgets and all the idiotic parents who make idiotic behavior "normal".
"Maybe in order to understand Mankind, we have to look at the word
itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words -
"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean ? It's a mystery, and that's
why so is mankind."
-Jack Handy