"If the Apple PC ever gets serious market share, it will attract serious regulatory attention." and if pigs they may attract attention from the FAA.
Apple's business model is niche high-priced ("overpriced" according to most). I don't know what "Its business model opens it to large monopsony power if it ever gets large". This is true for any company, lots of power in the market spells bad news for any consumer (look at DeBeers if you want to see a real monopoly). Oligopolies exist at virtually every level of the computer industry, and will continue to exist. Although Microsoft has the mainstream desktop environment under its thumb, there will probably be room for alternatives (OSX, Unix vendors) until software operates seemlessly across multiple platforms.
Yea, my point didn't come across that clearly. This is an ideal piece of armor for very specialized applications. Don't know what direction the military is moving with mounted armaments, I'd think in the future we'll see joy-stick controlled metal-storm/.50 cals where the gunner is inside a vehicle with software aided remote targeting. Best defense is a good offense you know (especially with RPGs and IEDs).
SWAT-style applications are a good potential use. Especially for urban police forces. I am skeptical of how much military use this thing would see.
Wouldn't want to be wearing one in the desert (jungle, etc), probably a reason why there is limited government interest. Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit... but that would probably require portable energy beyound military logistical capabilies.
This isn't a matter of discomfort; dehydration and heat exhaustion would probably make this thing useless for large scale deployment. Maybe good for police forces, or soldiers operating in very hostile condtions, but probably too expensive and immature for mainstream deployment.
"The biggest problem we have here in the third world, other than education, is housing."
First of all, in my opinion, the major obstacle holding back Africa is political instability. Wars, genocide, and corrupt government are bad for an economy.
I doubt this will see much use in the third world, it would be more practical for places where housing costs cripple working-class families. Like America for instance. Costs of housing are skyrocketing in urban areas, I just read a rather good book called "Nickle And Dimed" detailing a PhD's experiment as a minimum wage worker in Maine, Minneapolis, and Florida.
I pay $500 a month (w/o utils) for a shithole 5 br house in Minneapolis, and thats only my share. Efficiencies run about $550 and single br runs about $700-$800. In my hometown of Duluth (about 100,000 people), we could rent a 5 br, in a similar neighborhood for around 200-250 per person. A single br w/ kitchen is about $450. From my experiences as a working student, in Minneapolis someone who makes $8 per/hr would make about $6 in Duluth. The average wage difference seems to be about $2 for jobs in the $5.15 - $15.00 per hr range. I'll let you fiddle with the numbers, but imagine trying to live on $1000 per month when rent and utilities is over half your paycheck. Include gas, car-expenses, food, entertainment, and you are left with nil at the end of the month. Don't even think about seeing a doctor either.
The dot-com boom was the largest creation (and destruction) of wealth in human history. Of course jobs were lost because there isn't the artifically created wealth (think highly overvalued stock prices) to support it.
Unfortunately the number of people able to provide IT support is growing in foreign countries where the standard of living (cost is lower). Learning to configure networks doesn't require a ton of learning. A lot of people are capable of managing networks, hell I was doing it for $7.50 an hour when I was 16 (at a larger hotel). I worked technical support for an ISP for $6.50 an hour. IT work just isn't as valuable as it used to be. Admins can manage more computers with less training nowadays. On the other hand, demand for U.S. computer engineers/programmers continues to rise. This skill is highly math-centric
Lets face it, the decline of the IT industry is like any other. It is creative destruction, lower-paying jobs are outsourced to make room for new ones that require more human (or other) capital. A four-year degree ain't what it used to be.
Yes, it is not news, this phone will be an "overpriced" fashion accessory. Call me a "rapid mac fanboy" or whatever, but I want one badly because it will look slick and others will stare at it when I bust it out. Yes, older phones have the same features, are cheaper, etc... but I doubt they will pull of an interface quite like the iPhone. It is damn slick looking too. I have $200 in the gadget fund, and I was looking for a PDA phone, but i am going to continue saving for the iPhone.
My point? Lots of other college students with disposable income will be early adopters too. Techies or not. IT IS FASHIONABLE (like the ipod). Same things with high school kids wanting a slick phone, maybe some business professionals/middle income 20 to 30 somethings. Apple has turned pretty gadgets into an "overpriced" fashion statement before. Moto did it with the Razr, and apple will probably do it with the iPhone.
This could mark an entirely new era for apple. I don't like to be an "I told you so" type of guy, but I could see this coming in the last few months. Why? Becayse from an business's standpoint it would be foolish if apple didn't capitalize on the current state of the mobile phone market.
It is highly gimmick centric, and moving toward MP3 phones as a standard feature (and away from camera phones). Apple could use its stanglehold on the Mp3 market much to its advantage. The iPhone will be a success because it will blend ultra-slick design with Apple's killer eye-candy interface. Whether or not it is a good phone is irrelevant because it will be such a fashion statement to own one. THe devices are more similar (mp3-players and phones) than anyone (on slashdot) would like to admit, and who wants to carry two devices anyway? In other words, Apple may have found the iPod's replacement by jumping back into the mobile phone market.
Re:Cell providers are the problem, not the phone
on
Inside Apple's iPhone
·
· Score: 1
"For me VOIP on a PDA is the way to go. Works great with with my wireless broadband, or wi-fi hot-spots if they are around. Not the most reliable setup for incoming calls, but having a $10/month pager solves that problem."
BUAAG (But You Are A Geek!). Most consumers do not want to dink with their phone to answer/make a call. The cell phone market is about fashionability (I make up words). Look at apple's success with the iPod, to paraphrase some magazine article I read a while ago, even if you are decked out in armani while listening to a iPod nano, the nano is the "hottest" fashion statement you could make. Enter the iPhone.
Apple is on an upswing of profitability. Their shareholders are looking for the next killer app. As we have seen before on slashdot, iPod sales are sagging. Mobile phone sales are trending towards MP3 capabilities (due to the inexpensiveness of integrating the technology). iTunes on the Moto ROCKR created some tech-buzz, but the technical limitations of the phone didn't make it a top seller (no expandible memory, limited provider availability etc). To sum up my argument, apple would be stupid not to exploit the ignorance of consumers in the cell phone market.
Enter the iPhone. If apple can squeeze enough battery juice into it to give it decent talk-time/MP3 playback they have a winner. Consumers are fickle for gimmicky technology. Especially iTunes since they are familiar with it. The amount of web-buzz created by YEARS of iPhone rumors will definitely create some geek-cred for the device. So, to sum up my opinion, and iPhone may have not been in the works when the geeks were calling for it, but if it isn't now, Apple is very foolish for not exploiting some easy profits. The technology is there, and cheap. The software is saturated within consumers of all levels of technical knowledge. The geeks are calling for it, and may be enough to generate some sales with positive recommendations and reviews. A wise corporation would exploit this.
Actually Deer hides are relatively valuable, and the butcher will usually sell them. My buddy gets $5-$10 per hide ontop of his butchering charge. Quite nice for deer-skin gloves (typically made in China). As an experienced Northern hunter, I don't know why you think that Bear and Moose hides are easy to come by. They are typically the most regulated game in terms of getting a permit. You may have to wait 5 years to get a Moose permit in some parts of the country, and rifle Bear permits are also granted via a lottery system in Wisconsin and Minnesota.
But to answer your question "why would you even bother?". Well, as a deer-hunter in an area where these 'robots' have been in use for years already, it is often a matter of hunter's safety. The DNR/Conservation Officer will put a decoy in a position where it will be shot at from the road. It is illegal to hunt within 50 yards of a public road's median. Quite a hefty fine. Also, if a hunter is willing to break that regulation, who knows what other rules they are breaking.
I don't know how giving very poor people computers will solve much of anything. Give a poor family a computer in the united states and see how well it improves their situation... I don't think that providing laptops to children in these countries will do much to bridge the enormous gap that exists in world wide education. Computers can be a useful tool, but they are more of a supplemental tool than a stand-alone teacher. I have grown up in the information era, and I certainly have learned a hell of a lot more from my college and highschool education that computers alone. Sure there will be some kids or people that can usefully use laptops to learn valuable skills and research other economically beneficial things, but I believe this will be a very small minority of the population because especially in rural 3rd world areas there is VERY little education (or at least from what I've read and seen in rural Mexico, and Tanzania).
What is the best way to help impoverished people? Well... hope to make them more self-sufficient like the parent said. One way to accomplish this is via "micro-loans", a program established by the World Bank with a few other charity programs running their own equivalent. Basically, loaning people small sums of money (usually less than $100). You'd be suprised at how far $100 will go in terms of establishing farms or creating small industry. The repayment rate is over 90%, but the number of loans made is far less than is needed. Investment leads to growth, simple as that, economics 101. The only problem is that many people don't want to loan their money out at a very low interest rate to accomodate the neads of developing communities, so the lenders are restricted to those in the non-profit category, doing it out of the goodness of their own heart.
The sad reality of a world market-economy is that wealth becomes very unevenly distributed as the labor becomes more and more specialized. In other words, people who don't have valuable skills (usually obtained through education) get left further and further behind. There are many people living in very similar conditions to over 1000 years ago. They are malnourished, poor, and destined to labor VERY HARD to put barely (or not) enough food on the table.
I don't think that cellular phone companies have made any significant leaps in voice-clarity since I had my first Nokia. Many of the old Nokias are awesome, my grandparents have been using the same ones since around 1998 (with new batteries tho). I don't understand why so many people complain about the quality of current phones when you can pick a decent one up on ebay for less than $30. They are damn near indestructable, and are minimalistic. You can even get some sweet detachable 100 dollar bill faceplate, and a blinging battery.
Explain to me how limiting bandwidth to the minority of homes with internet access will stiffle economic growth. This is a reasonable (from their perspective) censorship policy aimed at reducing the global expansion of Western culture. Believe it or not, much of American culture (movies, rap, etc) is downright obscene to the conservative Islamic world, and I am sure the Tehran (ruling party) wishes to avoid the kind of cultural duality present in the United States among Muslims. For example, the 13 year old Muslim boy in NY who memorized the entire Quran (which guaruntees entrance to heaven), and says his favorite music is rap and his favorite passtime is playing GTA: San Andreas.
Iran has actually made good progress in the past 10 years diversifying its economy, and modernizing its exports. It has moved away from commodities, although about 75% IIRC of its 2000 GDP comes from petro-exports. The size and wealth of the middle class has been steadily growing as well. The biotechnology, pharmacuticals, and construction supplies/equipment producers are all government supervised, and will undoubtedly have adequate access to bandwidth.
The other huge nomenclature problem is what is meant by "organic"?
It is actually specified specifically by the USDA, here is a brief description http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/Consumers/brochure.htm l. Notice it says "most pesticides", contrary to popular belief, organic farmers still use pesticides and unnatural fertilizers! It is a ripoff targeting middle-class housewives... read my above post for more ranting, and info about how you can still find non-GM foods in any supermarket.
First of all, let me say that I am biased against organic foods, for no reason other than I think it is too trendy and some people buy as a status symbol, rather than for environmental/health concerns. For example, my friend's Prius driving mother who spends $25 on 'organic' laundry detergent, buys all her food at a co-op (my mom shops there too btw), while there are many people in this city who must chose between rent and food. I think it is wasteful to spend more money on food than necessary.
Some people I have met are opposed to GM foods for health concerns, but you CERTAINLY CAN BUY NON-MODIFIED PRODUCE AT ANY GROCERY STORE!! Any GM produce has a sticker with a 4 digit number beginning with 8. Organic begins with 9. VERY few foods at the supermarket begin with an 8. Most genetically modified food is found in processed foods (according to today's Minneapolis star-tribune newspaper), which is bad for you anyway. Anyone who is well informed about proper nutrition understands that a high-protein, low cholesterol, moderately fatty (good fats), balanced carbohydrate diet is best for your health. As my doctor once put it, eating "cave-man" foods is best for your health. Take responsibility for your own health! Don't eat lots of fried, or processed foods, even from restaurants! Conspiracy theories about "big-food" manipulating the FDA with bribes and hookers aside, I am sure that eating OilFresh fried foods once in a while is less harmful than eating ordinary fried food every day.
Also, another topic I think I should bring up is that applying better technology to food is arguably necessitated by one of the most accurate, prevailing theories of economics for the last two centuries. This is known as the Malthusian Model of Growth, and it has very accurately predicted population levels for humans and animals until roughly 1850. It doesn't take into account technology, but basically states that population will become constant (over the Long-Run) because land resources are finite. Without technology improving our food resouces, everyone will survive on the bare minimum (over the Long-Run), and growth will taper off.
It isn't always practical to "just not use wireless". Sometimes (always) corporate managers who are more concerned with profit than security are calling the shots, and aren't really concerned with some uber-hacker infiltrating the wireless network. Don't get me wrong, we take security very seriously because it is regulated by federal law (HIPAA), but the damage of a security breach is greatly outweighed by total $$$ savings.
For example, WiFi has saved the hospital I work at tens of thousands (at least). Certain doctors now carry tablets and iPaqs, and this has significantly improved productivity. Tablets enable them to access any supplemental patient info that isn't on the patient's chart, rather than waiting for someone to print it off. They can even access information at other facilities, to retrieve things like lab results and MRIs that were down outside our hospitals. IPaqs make their schedule and (more importantly) email readily available, so they don't have to get paged, and then call a secretary to get a msg. Specialists/Surgeons are VERY expensive people, so wasting as little time as possible save the corporation hundreds of thousands every year.
TIME=MONEY, its as simple as that. Wireless can save certain businesses TONS of money, by reducing the "unproductivity" of expensive personnel.
Short Answer: You can have all these things, but you have to pay a lot more
Long Answer:
Its all about pricepoint marketing, in other words what people want per extra dollar spent. The market is saturated with cheap hardware, so consumers usually will pay extra for a few different reasons. Color isn't really a significant consideration to anyone, it would be difficult to convince any consumer that a particular color of plastic is important.
Sony and Apple market most notebooks toward the luxury pc consumer. My mom recently bought a 17inch VAIO core duo 1.66ghz, 1 gig ram, dvd-r, webcam. It was pretty friggen sleek. It has a razer thin display, less than 7 pounds, crisp display, and the most expensive 3-year warranty option.
Look at the comperable Macbook Pro. My mom simply wanted an elegant, high-quality machine. If bootcamp was released, she could have easily been a Macbook Pro consumer, although a 15-inch would likely suffice. She has the 17-inch xga laptop hooked into a 17-inch LCD display.
So why are Apple consumers like windows consumers?
Because my mom is by no means computer illiterate (unlike my father), she understood that there was some more value in the additional dollars spent on a computer. Obviously aesthetics, and the perception of higher quailty(reliability) factored into her decision. She considered 'Price vs. Aesthetics and Reputation and Warranty and Power/Specs' . The price of the competition was not important to her, since she had already determined to spend $2000. Macbook Pro users also make a similar decision, deciding that a $2000-$3000 purchase decision (well above average) is providing significant gains not quantifyable in terms of hardware cost.
y father has only used Lotus Notes, and isn't very interested in PCs outside of work. He is also a penny-pinching accountant for a non-profit, so he considers pc buying in the terms of 'Price vs. Price of Competition', every computer around his office is generic, or cheapo-retail boxes. He purchases with minimum consideration.
Then you have people like me, I owned an iBook through 4 years of college. When purchasing a notebook for college, I considered a lot more things than my mom or pop when buying a PC. I am also a lifelong geek, who has been around computers since birth. When purchasing my iBook i considered Price vs. Reliability and Price of Competition. and Geek-factor and Aesthetics and so on... representing the typical power-user who is in the market for a Macbook. I foremost wanted reliability and portability, and the aesthetics were nice. Unfortunately, the reported defects discouraged me from buying a MacBook, and I purchased a HP convertible tablet that is also a quailty notebook.
The point is that your collect considerations of wanting something "pure of Spyware, Security Flaws, unstability," that "manage[s] to be Sexy at the same time" is only limited by how much you want to pay for it. My tablet it realitively free of all these things, with some extra cool-factor. If you spend $3000 on a MacBook Pro, you can have something that is damn close to unbeatable for all these things, but you have to pay $3000 for a damn computer.
What about service industry employees? I used to work in a restaraunt that allowed smoking, and I didn't like inhaling that shit for six hours. "Well then don't work there!" you say? I was 16, and believe it or not, there are not very many opportunities for non-college graduates in the workforce. Most of my coworkers didn't even have a highschool diploma. A lot of them had been working in restaurants for 3+ years, some as many as 20+ years, and second-hand smoke becomes a real concern when you are exposed to it for 8 hours a day 5-6 times a week. Smoking bans are designed with the actual employees in mind, and how bad is it really to step outside and smoke?
"ball-sweat" aside, your hands are dirtier than your penis... your willy touches your underwear and isn't exposed to the germs that cover everything. Who really cares about germs? Most germs can be pathogenic, but only in the right circumstances and environment. I wash my hands after touching a public keyboard, before preparing/eating food, after pooping, and that is about it... i am typically not so concerned with the inch wide area along my thumb and forefinger that comes into contact with the one of the most pathogen-free parts of my body.
VLC seems to be the fastest client between quicktime and mplayer on OSX. Both VLC and MPlayer were native builds too (no xdarwin). I have a slow, old 600mhz ibook, and I am able to surf the web, open apps, etc, and really never see choppy video. Especially with large video files MPlayer and Quicktime seem to bog down, I was unable to watch a 70 mb episode of Aqua Teen Hunger Force without horrible framerates on either QT or MPlayer, but VLC worked perfectly.
With intel increasingly becoming dominant in mobile markets, particularly capturing the next-gen Apple market share, I think that cost-cutting is eminent. AMD holds a firm grasp on the fastest chips, and some of their 64-bit chips are available in notebooks geared toward power-users wanting desktop replacements. There is a big difference nowadays between the size, heat output, power consumption, and power, so chip makers need to emphasize on certain markets. Intel couldn't hope to maintain dominance forever, and AMD and Intel have become the x86 processor oligopoly, both of them basing their business decisions on each other. AMD has done some fantastic R&D and built itself from the ground up, and there has really been nowhere for intel to go but down. Both these companies will be around for the foreseeable future, at least until some Chinese/Korean/Japanese company whoops us =)
Slashdot Mirror
"If the Apple PC ever gets serious market share, it will attract serious regulatory attention." and if pigs they may attract attention from the FAA.
Apple's business model is niche high-priced ("overpriced" according to most). I don't know what "Its business model opens it to large monopsony power if it ever gets large". This is true for any company, lots of power in the market spells bad news for any consumer (look at DeBeers if you want to see a real monopoly). Oligopolies exist at virtually every level of the computer industry, and will continue to exist. Although Microsoft has the mainstream desktop environment under its thumb, there will probably be room for alternatives (OSX, Unix vendors) until software operates seemlessly across multiple platforms.
How this is modded +5 insightful? I don't know.
Yea, my point didn't come across that clearly. This is an ideal piece of armor for very specialized applications. Don't know what direction the military is moving with mounted armaments, I'd think in the future we'll see joy-stick controlled metal-storm/.50 cals where the gunner is inside a vehicle with software aided remote targeting. Best defense is a good offense you know (especially with RPGs and IEDs).
SWAT-style applications are a good potential use. Especially for urban police forces. I am skeptical of how much military use this thing would see.
Wouldn't want to be wearing one in the desert (jungle, etc), probably a reason why there is limited government interest. Unless this things has some sort of personal AC unit... but that would probably require portable energy beyound military logistical capabilies.
This isn't a matter of discomfort; dehydration and heat exhaustion would probably make this thing useless for large scale deployment. Maybe good for police forces, or soldiers operating in very hostile condtions, but probably too expensive and immature for mainstream deployment.
"The biggest problem we have here in the third world, other than education, is housing."
First of all, in my opinion, the major obstacle holding back Africa is political instability. Wars, genocide, and corrupt government are bad for an economy.
I doubt this will see much use in the third world, it would be more practical for places where housing costs cripple working-class families. Like America for instance. Costs of housing are skyrocketing in urban areas, I just read a rather good book called "Nickle And Dimed" detailing a PhD's experiment as a minimum wage worker in Maine, Minneapolis, and Florida.
I pay $500 a month (w/o utils) for a shithole 5 br house in Minneapolis, and thats only my share. Efficiencies run about $550 and single br runs about $700-$800. In my hometown of Duluth (about 100,000 people), we could rent a 5 br, in a similar neighborhood for around 200-250 per person. A single br w/ kitchen is about $450. From my experiences as a working student, in Minneapolis someone who makes $8 per/hr would make about $6 in Duluth. The average wage difference seems to be about $2 for jobs in the $5.15 - $15.00 per hr range. I'll let you fiddle with the numbers, but imagine trying to live on $1000 per month when rent and utilities is over half your paycheck. Include gas, car-expenses, food, entertainment, and you are left with nil at the end of the month. Don't even think about seeing a doctor either.
I don't need cool gadgets to pick up chicks. All I need is a celly to stay in their ear homeboy. They don't give a fuck about gadgets.
The dot-com boom was the largest creation (and destruction) of wealth in human history. Of course jobs were lost because there isn't the artifically created wealth (think highly overvalued stock prices) to support it.
Unfortunately the number of people able to provide IT support is growing in foreign countries where the standard of living (cost is lower). Learning to configure networks doesn't require a ton of learning. A lot of people are capable of managing networks, hell I was doing it for $7.50 an hour when I was 16 (at a larger hotel). I worked technical support for an ISP for $6.50 an hour. IT work just isn't as valuable as it used to be. Admins can manage more computers with less training nowadays. On the other hand, demand for U.S. computer engineers/programmers continues to rise. This skill is highly math-centric
Lets face it, the decline of the IT industry is like any other. It is creative destruction, lower-paying jobs are outsourced to make room for new ones that require more human (or other) capital. A four-year degree ain't what it used to be.
Yes, it is not news, this phone will be an "overpriced" fashion accessory. Call me a "rapid mac fanboy" or whatever, but I want one badly because it will look slick and others will stare at it when I bust it out. Yes, older phones have the same features, are cheaper, etc... but I doubt they will pull of an interface quite like the iPhone. It is damn slick looking too. I have $200 in the gadget fund, and I was looking for a PDA phone, but i am going to continue saving for the iPhone.
My point? Lots of other college students with disposable income will be early adopters too. Techies or not. IT IS FASHIONABLE (like the ipod). Same things with high school kids wanting a slick phone, maybe some business professionals/middle income 20 to 30 somethings. Apple has turned pretty gadgets into an "overpriced" fashion statement before. Moto did it with the Razr, and apple will probably do it with the iPhone.
This could mark an entirely new era for apple. I don't like to be an "I told you so" type of guy, but I could see this coming in the last few months. Why? Becayse from an business's standpoint it would be foolish if apple didn't capitalize on the current state of the mobile phone market.
It is highly gimmick centric, and moving toward MP3 phones as a standard feature (and away from camera phones). Apple could use its stanglehold on the Mp3 market much to its advantage. The iPhone will be a success because it will blend ultra-slick design with Apple's killer eye-candy interface. Whether or not it is a good phone is irrelevant because it will be such a fashion statement to own one. THe devices are more similar (mp3-players and phones) than anyone (on slashdot) would like to admit, and who wants to carry two devices anyway? In other words, Apple may have found the iPod's replacement by jumping back into the mobile phone market.
"For me VOIP on a PDA is the way to go. Works great with with my wireless broadband, or wi-fi hot-spots if they are around. Not the most reliable setup for incoming calls, but having a $10/month pager solves that problem."
BUAAG (But You Are A Geek!). Most consumers do not want to dink with their phone to answer/make a call. The cell phone market is about fashionability (I make up words). Look at apple's success with the iPod, to paraphrase some magazine article I read a while ago, even if you are decked out in armani while listening to a iPod nano, the nano is the "hottest" fashion statement you could make. Enter the iPhone.
Apple is on an upswing of profitability. Their shareholders are looking for the next killer app. As we have seen before on slashdot, iPod sales are sagging. Mobile phone sales are trending towards MP3 capabilities (due to the inexpensiveness of integrating the technology). iTunes on the Moto ROCKR created some tech-buzz, but the technical limitations of the phone didn't make it a top seller (no expandible memory, limited provider availability etc). To sum up my argument, apple would be stupid not to exploit the ignorance of consumers in the cell phone market.
Enter the iPhone. If apple can squeeze enough battery juice into it to give it decent talk-time/MP3 playback they have a winner. Consumers are fickle for gimmicky technology. Especially iTunes since they are familiar with it. The amount of web-buzz created by YEARS of iPhone rumors will definitely create some geek-cred for the device. So, to sum up my opinion, and iPhone may have not been in the works when the geeks were calling for it, but if it isn't now, Apple is very foolish for not exploiting some easy profits. The technology is there, and cheap. The software is saturated within consumers of all levels of technical knowledge. The geeks are calling for it, and may be enough to generate some sales with positive recommendations and reviews. A wise corporation would exploit this.
Actually Deer hides are relatively valuable, and the butcher will usually sell them. My buddy gets $5-$10 per hide ontop of his butchering charge. Quite nice for deer-skin gloves (typically made in China). As an experienced Northern hunter, I don't know why you think that Bear and Moose hides are easy to come by. They are typically the most regulated game in terms of getting a permit. You may have to wait 5 years to get a Moose permit in some parts of the country, and rifle Bear permits are also granted via a lottery system in Wisconsin and Minnesota.
But to answer your question "why would you even bother?". Well, as a deer-hunter in an area where these 'robots' have been in use for years already, it is often a matter of hunter's safety. The DNR/Conservation Officer will put a decoy in a position where it will be shot at from the road. It is illegal to hunt within 50 yards of a public road's median. Quite a hefty fine. Also, if a hunter is willing to break that regulation, who knows what other rules they are breaking.
I don't know how giving very poor people computers will solve much of anything. Give a poor family a computer in the united states and see how well it improves their situation...
I don't think that providing laptops to children in these countries will do much to bridge the enormous gap that exists in world wide education. Computers can be a useful tool, but they are more of a supplemental tool than a stand-alone teacher. I have grown up in the information era, and I certainly have learned a hell of a lot more from my college and highschool education that computers alone. Sure there will be some kids or people that can usefully use laptops to learn valuable skills and research other economically beneficial things, but I believe this will be a very small minority of the population because especially in rural 3rd world areas there is VERY little education (or at least from what I've read and seen in rural Mexico, and Tanzania).
What is the best way to help impoverished people? Well... hope to make them more self-sufficient like the parent said. One way to accomplish this is via "micro-loans", a program established by the World Bank with a few other charity programs running their own equivalent. Basically, loaning people small sums of money (usually less than $100). You'd be suprised at how far $100 will go in terms of establishing farms or creating small industry. The repayment rate is over 90%, but the number of loans made is far less than is needed. Investment leads to growth, simple as that, economics 101. The only problem is that many people don't want to loan their money out at a very low interest rate to accomodate the neads of developing communities, so the lenders are restricted to those in the non-profit category, doing it out of the goodness of their own heart.
The sad reality of a world market-economy is that wealth becomes very unevenly distributed as the labor becomes more and more specialized. In other words, people who don't have valuable skills (usually obtained through education) get left further and further behind. There are many people living in very similar conditions to over 1000 years ago. They are malnourished, poor, and destined to labor VERY HARD to put barely (or not) enough food on the table.
I don't think that cellular phone companies have made any significant leaps in voice-clarity since I had my first Nokia. Many of the old Nokias are awesome, my grandparents have been using the same ones since around 1998 (with new batteries tho). I don't understand why so many people complain about the quality of current phones when you can pick a decent one up on ebay for less than $30. They are damn near indestructable, and are minimalistic. You can even get some sweet detachable 100 dollar bill faceplate, and a blinging battery.
Explain to me how limiting bandwidth to the minority of homes with internet access will stiffle economic growth. This is a reasonable (from their perspective) censorship policy aimed at reducing the global expansion of Western culture. Believe it or not, much of American culture (movies, rap, etc) is downright obscene to the conservative Islamic world, and I am sure the Tehran (ruling party) wishes to avoid the kind of cultural duality present in the United States among Muslims. For example, the 13 year old Muslim boy in NY who memorized the entire Quran (which guaruntees entrance to heaven), and says his favorite music is rap and his favorite passtime is playing GTA: San Andreas.
Iran has actually made good progress in the past 10 years diversifying its economy, and modernizing its exports. It has moved away from commodities, although about 75% IIRC of its 2000 GDP comes from petro-exports. The size and wealth of the middle class has been steadily growing as well. The biotechnology, pharmacuticals, and construction supplies/equipment producers are all government supervised, and will undoubtedly have adequate access to bandwidth.
I think we should spade all lawyers immediately
Nah... I think we should club em instead
btw, I think you meant 'spay' (or neuter) them instead
Its called Bacta. It was invented a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away. http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/List_of_Star_ Wars_substances
me too, its called Bacta http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/List_of_Star_ Wars_substances
The other huge nomenclature problem is what is meant by "organic"?
m l. Notice it says "most pesticides", contrary to popular belief, organic farmers still use pesticides and unnatural fertilizers! It is a ripoff targeting middle-class housewives... read my above post for more ranting, and info about how you can still find non-GM foods in any supermarket.
It is actually specified specifically by the USDA, here is a brief description http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/Consumers/brochure.ht
First of all, let me say that I am biased against organic foods, for no reason other than I think it is too trendy and some people buy as a status symbol, rather than for environmental/health concerns. For example, my friend's Prius driving mother who spends $25 on 'organic' laundry detergent, buys all her food at a co-op (my mom shops there too btw), while there are many people in this city who must chose between rent and food. I think it is wasteful to spend more money on food than necessary.
Some people I have met are opposed to GM foods for health concerns, but you CERTAINLY CAN BUY NON-MODIFIED PRODUCE AT ANY GROCERY STORE!! Any GM produce has a sticker with a 4 digit number beginning with 8. Organic begins with 9. VERY few foods at the supermarket begin with an 8. Most genetically modified food is found in processed foods (according to today's Minneapolis star-tribune newspaper), which is bad for you anyway. Anyone who is well informed about proper nutrition understands that a high-protein, low cholesterol, moderately fatty (good fats), balanced carbohydrate diet is best for your health. As my doctor once put it, eating "cave-man" foods is best for your health. Take responsibility for your own health! Don't eat lots of fried, or processed foods, even from restaurants! Conspiracy theories about "big-food" manipulating the FDA with bribes and hookers aside, I am sure that eating OilFresh fried foods once in a while is less harmful than eating ordinary fried food every day.
Also, another topic I think I should bring up is that applying better technology to food is arguably necessitated by one of the most accurate, prevailing theories of economics for the last two centuries. This is known as the Malthusian Model of Growth, and it has very accurately predicted population levels for humans and animals until roughly 1850. It doesn't take into account technology, but basically states that population will become constant (over the Long-Run) because land resources are finite. Without technology improving our food resouces, everyone will survive on the bare minimum (over the Long-Run), and growth will taper off.
It isn't always practical to "just not use wireless". Sometimes (always) corporate managers who are more concerned with profit than security are calling the shots, and aren't really concerned with some uber-hacker infiltrating the wireless network. Don't get me wrong, we take security very seriously because it is regulated by federal law (HIPAA), but the damage of a security breach is greatly outweighed by total $$$ savings.
For example, WiFi has saved the hospital I work at tens of thousands (at least). Certain doctors now carry tablets and iPaqs, and this has significantly improved productivity. Tablets enable them to access any supplemental patient info that isn't on the patient's chart, rather than waiting for someone to print it off. They can even access information at other facilities, to retrieve things like lab results and MRIs that were down outside our hospitals. IPaqs make their schedule and (more importantly) email readily available, so they don't have to get paged, and then call a secretary to get a msg. Specialists/Surgeons are VERY expensive people, so wasting as little time as possible save the corporation hundreds of thousands every year.
TIME=MONEY, its as simple as that. Wireless can save certain businesses TONS of money, by reducing the "unproductivity" of expensive personnel.
Short Answer: You can have all these things, but you have to pay a lot more
Long Answer:
Its all about pricepoint marketing, in other words what people want per extra dollar spent. The market is saturated with cheap hardware, so consumers usually will pay extra for a few different reasons. Color isn't really a significant consideration to anyone, it would be difficult to convince any consumer that a particular color of plastic is important.
Sony and Apple market most notebooks toward the luxury pc consumer. My mom recently bought a 17inch VAIO core duo 1.66ghz, 1 gig ram, dvd-r, webcam. It was pretty friggen sleek. It has a razer thin display, less than 7 pounds, crisp display, and the most expensive 3-year warranty option.
Look at the comperable Macbook Pro. My mom simply wanted an elegant, high-quality machine. If bootcamp was released, she could have easily been a Macbook Pro consumer, although a 15-inch would likely suffice. She has the 17-inch xga laptop hooked into a 17-inch LCD display.
So why are Apple consumers like windows consumers?
Because my mom is by no means computer illiterate (unlike my father), she understood that there was some more value in the additional dollars spent on a computer. Obviously aesthetics, and the perception of higher quailty(reliability) factored into her decision. She considered 'Price vs. Aesthetics and Reputation and Warranty and Power/Specs' . The price of the competition was not important to her, since she had already determined to spend $2000. Macbook Pro users also make a similar decision, deciding that a $2000-$3000 purchase decision (well above average) is providing significant gains not quantifyable in terms of hardware cost.
y father has only used Lotus Notes, and isn't very interested in PCs outside of work. He is also a penny-pinching accountant for a non-profit, so he considers pc buying in the terms of 'Price vs. Price of Competition', every computer around his office is generic, or cheapo-retail boxes. He purchases with minimum consideration.
Then you have people like me, I owned an iBook through 4 years of college. When purchasing a notebook for college, I considered a lot more things than my mom or pop when buying a PC. I am also a lifelong geek, who has been around computers since birth. When purchasing my iBook i considered Price vs. Reliability and Price of Competition. and Geek-factor and Aesthetics and so on... representing the typical power-user who is in the market for a Macbook. I foremost wanted reliability and portability, and the aesthetics were nice. Unfortunately, the reported defects discouraged me from buying a MacBook, and I purchased a HP convertible tablet that is also a quailty notebook.
The point is that your collect considerations of wanting something "pure of Spyware, Security Flaws, unstability," that "manage[s] to be Sexy at the same time" is only limited by how much you want to pay for it. My tablet it realitively free of all these things, with some extra cool-factor. If you spend $3000 on a MacBook Pro, you can have something that is damn close to unbeatable for all these things, but you have to pay $3000 for a damn computer.
What about service industry employees? I used to work in a restaraunt that allowed smoking, and I didn't like inhaling that shit for six hours. "Well then don't work there!" you say? I was 16, and believe it or not, there are not very many opportunities for non-college graduates in the workforce. Most of my coworkers didn't even have a highschool diploma. A lot of them had been working in restaurants for 3+ years, some as many as 20+ years, and second-hand smoke becomes a real concern when you are exposed to it for 8 hours a day 5-6 times a week. Smoking bans are designed with the actual employees in mind, and how bad is it really to step outside and smoke?
someone has seen Finding Forester.........
"ball-sweat" aside, your hands are dirtier than your penis... your willy touches your underwear and isn't exposed to the germs that cover everything. Who really cares about germs? Most germs can be pathogenic, but only in the right circumstances and environment. I wash my hands after touching a public keyboard, before preparing/eating food, after pooping, and that is about it... i am typically not so concerned with the inch wide area along my thumb and forefinger that comes into contact with the one of the most pathogen-free parts of my body.
VLC seems to be the fastest client between quicktime and mplayer on OSX. Both VLC and MPlayer were native builds too (no xdarwin). I have a slow, old 600mhz ibook, and I am able to surf the web, open apps, etc, and really never see choppy video. Especially with large video files MPlayer and Quicktime seem to bog down, I was unable to watch a 70 mb episode of Aqua Teen Hunger Force without horrible framerates on either QT or MPlayer, but VLC worked perfectly.
With intel increasingly becoming dominant in mobile markets, particularly capturing the next-gen Apple market share, I think that cost-cutting is eminent. AMD holds a firm grasp on the fastest chips, and some of their 64-bit chips are available in notebooks geared toward power-users wanting desktop replacements. There is a big difference nowadays between the size, heat output, power consumption, and power, so chip makers need to emphasize on certain markets. Intel couldn't hope to maintain dominance forever, and AMD and Intel have become the x86 processor oligopoly, both of them basing their business decisions on each other. AMD has done some fantastic R&D and built itself from the ground up, and there has really been nowhere for intel to go but down. Both these companies will be around for the foreseeable future, at least until some Chinese/Korean/Japanese company whoops us =)