How would you telll if Hispanic is an origin, not any particular race according to US definitions. You don't even need to have a spanish heritage to be hispanic. Any presumption is plain racism, because most often traits of native americans are decribed by many (even On this forum). But there are many sides to America. An American deciphered the Mayan scripture, same for their number system, and many critical archeological discoveries are by Americans. I am thriled by that diversity of respect, interest and positions towards sister countried/civilizations.
The big picture is a little bit more complicated than the average Joe can sense. The "brown hordes" or "he looks Mexican" also happen to be the second largest buyers of US goods, larger than all BRIC countries together, and larger than that of the top 5 economies combined. In one or two years, Mexico will be the largest buyer in the world. Industries like Airlines depend on Mexico with about 32% of all international flights being to/from Mexico. Entire industries depend on Mexican purchases to subsist. Those are just two examples that show that while there are reasons to be upset (immigration?), there are reasons why federal govt and the states may see things differently. Mexico also treats turists and people that want to go there extremely well. Go to Brazil and see how that changes. There are many reasons why hard working illegal immigrants are many times tolerated.
If you look at the big picture, Apple believes that Android is the new PC and having been been burned by PCs two decades ago, they want to destroy it before it's too late. And Microsoft thinks the PC is them, and Android is eating their lunch, and want it destroyed as soon as possible. Apple and Microsoft have a love/hate relationship. But don't forget Gates' investment in Apple in the late nineties plus the release of MS Office for Mac saved Apple. Each firm believes they can trump the other, but hate Google vehemently.
These lawsuits are testing the waters and signaling something bigger. And they are setting up the stage for the masses to start believing Android is just a cheap imitation. I prefer Apple phones, but would side with Android if Ms and Apple get nasty. I despise abusive oligopolies for what it means long term.
Yes, exactly. But why not treat private data as private property of the person generating the data. They can aggregate the results, but resulting in no personally identifiable information - because they don't own that data unless they license from owners. In any case, I agree it'd need to be legislated and that has a very slim chance.
I was suggesting in the same post that they'd need to license them and that EULA that contain things about your property (privacy) would have those clauses invalidated. But that can only happen when privacy becomes property.
What if the reality where that private data is private property? As a work of art or a thing itself. I believe that if I paint a like in a canvas I own it. If I write a poem I own it. Data I generate that is associated with me, is another form of expression, and I should own it. The problem is that how it's bern framed, as "privacy" as something I don't own, but may have some ethical reason for trying to prevent mining is the wrong approach. As a true libertarian things are simple: private data is private property of the citizen that created it. If you want use it, you must license it from the owner. Requiring the user to forfeit that right to use a service is illegal and a criminal act, theft.
And more seriously, I think that the solution is to use capitalism itself, which has a fundamental principle of private property. If my activity, information, habits and likes are my private company, you cannot use it unless I sold it to you. Just like you cannot take a picture of a celebrity and use that to promote a product or conduct business (only to report).
Same here. Companies should not be allowed to steal property from citizens. Their individual behavior is their own asset, whether thinking of it as their IP, asset or holding it copyright. EULAs that require surrendering it freely should be unenforceable and companies using unlicenced private data property should be fined and imprisioned.
What you do and what you read is your individual private is an economic matter, and it's now being hoarded to make money and without your consent: that's stealing.
There are billions of (temp) broken hearts. It may feed bad but it's not rape. If you want to be legaly punish the infidel, make a contract....back in my day it was called marriage and required some due dilligence.
Given that smartphones are the most widelydeployed and used general purpose computers in hands of individuals, I guess they do care. It's the future of computing.
They were in the market of cheap buffet style email for corp users and managed to get there by being convincing carriers to not price by kb with their platform.
The best chance of survival for them is to buy a T-mobile or Sprint (with the iPhone deal RIM is screwed now) and offer corp. plans for $30 a month, and then building an enterprise app ecosystem around a solid platform as QNX. No sane company will pay $100 per employee/mo if they could pay $30 and have a platform that can run apps just as good as the alternatives.
They though they where a premium brand with a premium product and now even if the products excel, they are irrelevant. If given a choice, most will prefer widely used platforms w/hundreds thousand apps and solid development tools.
Buying a carrier and being the low cost provider for corps is one of the few things that could save them - but may be too late.
Why? If I earn 250k a year, those $5000 I factor in as part of the cost. If I make 40k (family) it just means I am guaranted to nOt be able to afford it. How is your solution awesome?
The problem is not the insurance, but the actual cost of health services and they way the services are oversold, and prices not transparent. One is not even quoted the prices before incurring them. The economic model for health is broken, not the insurance itself.
10 hours battery means portable and warranteed to have battery while at school. form factor means better suited to typical classroom space form factor means several people can see screen at the same time (think groups) multitouch means new interfaces are possible (eg geography, puzzles and many other things) more sensors means new functionality possible...an app that overlays star names? imagine and assignment to look for mars at 9pm and being able to find it essily always on, as most tablets will have 3g enabled...maybe you can finish your assignment while on the bus back home?
these are lightarguments. the real arguments are in doing awesome educational apps that are just brilliant and a pleasure to use. just making learning more enjoyable can have a huge impact in kids knowledge. tablets also cost less than comparable quality netbooks and break less oftem
The consumption/creation model seems stupid when you consider that there are entire albums composed in iPhones (incl. one from Gorilaz), iPhone "live bands", a strong, large group of artists drawing digitally (fingerpainting) an awesome number of works, a lot of books written in iPads, and even movies done with iPhones.
High end engineering, programing or modeling is totally possible on a tablet. It will just take several years how the current status quo can be improved.
The consumption observation is only a reflexion of real life: most people prefer a tablet to broswe the web, but few people write books, paint masterpices, or compose popular albums.
Better for what? Is typing "Y" or scrolling a mose beter than just poining to a right answer? a tablet is a general porpuse computer that can immitate most input devices, from a piano keyboard to an analog synth, to an HP calculator, to just about anything existing or to be invented.
You haven't been paying attention. You can lock the iPad to a specific App with iOS 6. If you have no clue how they would help education, start looking. There are 50,000 educational apps in iOS or more. Star with the highest rated.
I don't say tablets solve education. I just say watch, people are finding where it makes sense superbly.
Why is this considered offtopic? Bill Gates has zero reign in the tablets but has tried to create tablet PCs numerous times. His company is great but not innovative, from DOS to WINDOWS, to EXCEL to even CONSOLES or MUSIC PLAYERS. What is wrong with the post? I find it pretty insightful. And add that Gates leads a PC market and is a total ignorant or blatantly biased. I know this from just watching my kid interact with an iPad. He draws, paints, learned the alphabet, can count to 20 in two languages, and has learned 1000 words just by experimenting with the iPad (Android or any non-keyboard centric-pc would do). He can resolve laberinth, color (and learn about 10 color names) on his own. He can sort by different criteria, and has learned to understand series(patterns) with edu-games like Monkey Math or Bugs and Buttons. He is learning the basics of pitches and a pentagrams by playing mozart on Pluto. He islearningphysics with DrawRace, which has a good dozeof realism. He learned to put puzzles togheter and is playing memorama.
A tablet means the interface is just a billion possibilities just not a fixed keyboard with letters. He is learning to draw letters with iWrieWords. A half month of a summer camp cost more than the iPad and the $25 spent on apps, and teaches far less?
We have limit his access to the iPad, and he goes to "school" as well. But whoever thinks that The PC has a grand role just because it has letters and python is misled, as is Bill Gayes and the future will make ridicule of his statements:
What defines a tablet is not the lack of keyboard. It's the fact that that input and output are one an the same. The fact that the iPad doesn't come stock with a keyboard unleashed so much creativity that right now, the largest contribution of Apple is in innovative ways to think of and interact with software.
In addition to that tablets unleashed new ways to share. While an iPad can be seen by 6 people around it (ips creen helps a lot) by being able to lay flat (360 degrees), most laptops have can't accomodate 2 people. You know this if you have both and find yoursef in a starbucks with a colleague (you have about 90 degrees), for one scenario.
But considering that Bill Gates is very smart, I must attribute his comments to biasedness. And since we are talking about education, I can only say the parent poster has all the rights and is quite insightful in his observations.
Bill Gates must wake up, and embrace a new world where the PC is just a tablet with a keyboard you can't detach and a screen where most apps assume you won't touch except through a pointer like a touchpad: a limied porpose specific device for heavy text input.
All in all, the power is in the apps. I cannot wait to see how kids will explore the world and sciences and arts using innovative interfaces That are just right.
Posted from my iPhone- Note: I like my Windows PC a lot and use it everyday. I don't need it for "learning" at all (but can use it).
There's a better algorithm. You don't need to debate whether you are stupid or not. You need to relay zero personal importance to what a rhird party says. In your argument, you are asserting that being stupid is something that can harm you. It cannot because people aren't what they do.
This is true in Argentina, USA or Mexico as far as I have seen. My conclusion is that is that it makes (among other things) them feel less poor. If Obama uses an iPhone, and you have an Phone, you have something in common. Then there's the entertainment factor. They can see the same things as the super rich. In a way, they are competing on equal ground. Of course, it doesn't make sense for an outsider. If i where in that situation, I'd expect progress and see value in making absolutely sure I don't burn a dollar without true need. But the most precious good is TIME itself. When you play console games, or watch a "great" show, you are paying dearly -not how much it costs to access, but the opportunity cost of doing something more rewarding, interesting and valuable for your future.
If people can form companies, people can form syndicates. And there are good and evil companies, and good an evil syndicates. The only problem is that companies can get very big quickly and monopolize, but people are always arguing among themselves. But the true hope is for a monopsony: a monopoly of buying power. That is the true strength of the citizen.It's what Walmart ultimately does. But people could kill any retailer by just -all together- refusing to buy goods/services from them during for a month. People do not realize that they are "a company" off kinds, and can't unite except when pissed of, like when BAC stated that they would charge for having debit accounts, or when Netflix said hey, I am going to double prices.
Slashdot Mirror
How would you telll if Hispanic is an origin, not any particular race according to US definitions. You don't even need to have a spanish heritage to be hispanic. Any presumption is plain racism, because most often traits of native americans are decribed by many (even On this forum). But there are many sides to America. An American deciphered the Mayan scripture, same for their number system, and many critical archeological discoveries are by Americans. I am thriled by that diversity of respect, interest and positions towards sister countried/civilizations.
The big picture is a little bit more complicated than the average Joe can sense. The "brown hordes" or "he looks Mexican" also happen to be the second largest buyers of US goods, larger than all BRIC countries together, and larger than that of the top 5 economies combined. In one or two years, Mexico will be the largest buyer in the world. Industries like Airlines depend on Mexico with about 32% of all international flights being to/from Mexico. Entire industries depend on Mexican purchases to subsist. Those are just two examples that show that while there are reasons to be upset (immigration?), there are reasons why federal govt and the states may see things differently. Mexico also treats turists and people that want to go there extremely well. Go to Brazil and see how that changes. There are many reasons why hard working illegal immigrants are many times tolerated.
If you look at the big picture, Apple believes that Android is the new PC and having been been burned by PCs two decades ago, they want to destroy it before it's too late. And Microsoft thinks the PC is them, and Android is eating their lunch, and want it destroyed as soon as possible. Apple and Microsoft have a love/hate relationship. But don't forget Gates' investment in Apple in the late nineties plus the release of MS Office for Mac saved Apple. Each firm believes they can trump the other, but hate Google vehemently.
These lawsuits are testing the waters and signaling something bigger. And they are setting up the stage for the masses to start believing Android is just a cheap imitation. I prefer Apple phones, but would side with Android if Ms and Apple get nasty. I despise abusive oligopolies for what it means long term.
Yes, exactly. But why not treat private data as private property of the person generating the data. They can aggregate the results, but resulting in no personally identifiable information - because they don't own that data unless they license from owners. In any case, I agree it'd need to be legislated and that has a very slim chance.
Yes, but I was refering to the background check service. They have a large number of services. Thanks
I was suggesting in the same post that they'd need to license them and that EULA that contain things about your property (privacy) would have those clauses invalidated. But that can only happen when privacy becomes property.
Agreed!
Can you point me to this "service"? I ddn't know they could report that per person. I'd appreciate that. Thanks
What if the reality where that private data is private property? As a work of art or a thing itself. I believe that if I paint a like in a canvas I own it. If I write a poem I own it. Data I generate that is associated with me, is another form of expression, and I should own it. The problem is that how it's bern framed, as "privacy" as something I don't own, but may have some ethical reason for trying to prevent mining is the wrong approach. As a true libertarian things are simple: private data is private property of the citizen that created it. If you want use it, you must license it from the owner. Requiring the user to forfeit that right to use a service is illegal and a criminal act, theft.
And more seriously, I think that the solution is to use capitalism itself, which has a fundamental principle of private property. If my activity, information, habits and likes are my private company, you cannot use it unless I sold it to you. Just like you cannot take a picture of a celebrity and use that to promote a product or conduct business (only to report).
Same here. Companies should not be allowed to steal property from citizens. Their individual behavior is their own asset, whether thinking of it as their IP, asset or holding it copyright. EULAs that require surrendering it freely should be unenforceable and companies using unlicenced private data property should be fined and imprisioned.
What you do and what you read is your individual private is an economic matter, and it's now being hoarded to make money and without your consent: that's stealing.
There are billions of (temp) broken hearts. It may feed bad but it's not rape. If you want to be legaly punish the infidel, make a contract....back in my day it was called marriage and required some due dilligence.
Given that smartphones are the most widelydeployed and used general purpose computers in hands of individuals, I guess they do care. It's the future of computing.
They were in the market of cheap buffet style email for corp users and managed to get there by being convincing carriers to not price by kb with their platform.
The best chance of survival for them is to buy a T-mobile or Sprint (with the iPhone deal RIM is screwed now) and offer corp. plans for $30 a month, and then building an enterprise app ecosystem around a solid platform as QNX. No sane company will pay $100 per employee/mo if they could pay $30 and have a platform that can run apps just as good as the alternatives.
They though they where a premium brand with a premium product and now even if the products excel, they are irrelevant. If given a choice, most will prefer widely used platforms w/hundreds thousand apps and solid development tools.
Buying a carrier and being the low cost provider for corps is one of the few things that could save them - but may be too late.
Why? If I earn 250k a year, those $5000 I factor in as part of the cost. If I make 40k (family) it just means I am guaranted to nOt be able to afford it. How is your solution awesome?
The problem is not the insurance, but the actual cost of health services and they way the services are oversold, and prices not transparent. One is not even quoted the prices before incurring them. The economic model for health is broken, not the insurance itself.
if I disable my laptop keyboard it's useless. so no.
10 hours battery means portable and warranteed to have battery while at school.
form factor means better suited to typical classroom space
form factor means several people can see screen at the same time (think groups)
multitouch means new interfaces are possible (eg geography, puzzles and many other things)
more sensors means new functionality possible...an app that overlays star names? imagine and assignment to look for mars at 9pm and being able to find it essily
always on, as most tablets will have 3g enabled...maybe you can finish your assignment while on the bus back home?
these are lightarguments. the real arguments are in doing awesome educational apps that are just brilliant and a pleasure to use. just making learning more enjoyable can have a huge impact in kids knowledge. tablets also cost less than comparable quality netbooks and break less oftem
nothing to prove, just browse the app store and iTunesU
Wasn't it QDOS to compete with CPM?
The consumption/creation model seems stupid when you consider that there are entire albums composed in iPhones (incl. one from Gorilaz), iPhone "live bands", a strong, large group of artists drawing digitally (fingerpainting) an awesome number of works, a lot of books written in iPads, and even movies done with iPhones.
High end engineering, programing or modeling is totally possible on a tablet. It will just take several years how the current status quo can be improved.
The consumption observation is only a reflexion of real life: most people prefer a tablet to broswe the web, but few people write books, paint masterpices, or compose popular albums.
Better for what? Is typing "Y" or scrolling a mose beter than just poining to a right answer? a tablet is a general porpuse computer that can immitate most input devices, from a piano keyboard to an analog synth, to an HP calculator, to just about anything existing or to be invented.
You haven't been paying attention. You can lock the iPad to a specific App with iOS 6. If you have no clue how they would help education, start looking. There are 50,000 educational apps in iOS or more. Star with the highest rated.
I don't say tablets solve education. I just say watch, people are finding where it makes sense superbly.
He spent windows licenses. Which is why I expected more integrity in his observations
Why is this considered offtopic? Bill Gates has zero reign in the tablets but has tried to create tablet PCs numerous times. His company is great but not innovative, from DOS to WINDOWS, to EXCEL to even CONSOLES or MUSIC PLAYERS. What is wrong with the post? I find it pretty insightful. And add that Gates leads a PC market and is a total ignorant or blatantly biased. I know this from just watching my kid interact with an iPad. He draws, paints, learned the alphabet, can count to 20 in two languages, and has learned 1000 words just by experimenting with the iPad (Android or any non-keyboard centric-pc would do). He can resolve laberinth, color (and learn about 10 color names) on his own. He can sort by different criteria, and has learned to understand series(patterns) with edu-games like Monkey Math or Bugs and Buttons. He is learning the basics of pitches and a pentagrams by playing mozart on Pluto. He islearningphysics with DrawRace, which has a good dozeof realism. He learned to put puzzles togheter and is playing memorama.
A tablet means the interface is just a billion possibilities just not a fixed keyboard with letters. He is learning to draw letters with iWrieWords. A half month of a summer camp cost more than the iPad and the $25 spent on apps, and teaches far less?
We have limit his access to the iPad, and he goes to "school" as well. But whoever thinks that The PC has a grand role just because it has letters and python is misled, as is Bill Gayes and the future will make ridicule of his statements:
What defines a tablet is not the lack of keyboard. It's the fact that that input and output are one an the same. The fact that the iPad doesn't come stock with a keyboard unleashed so much creativity that right now, the largest contribution of Apple is in innovative ways to think of and interact with software.
In addition to that tablets unleashed new ways to share. While an iPad can be seen by 6 people around it (ips creen helps a lot) by being able to lay flat (360 degrees), most laptops have can't accomodate 2 people. You know this if you have both and find yoursef in a starbucks with a colleague (you have about 90 degrees), for one scenario.
But considering that Bill Gates is very smart, I must attribute his comments to biasedness. And since we are talking about education, I can only say the parent poster has all the rights and is quite insightful in his observations.
Bill Gates must wake up, and embrace a new world where the PC is just a tablet with a keyboard you can't detach and a screen where most apps assume you won't touch except through a pointer like a touchpad: a limied porpose specific device for heavy text input.
All in all, the power is in the apps. I cannot wait to see how kids will explore the world and sciences and arts using innovative interfaces That are just right.
Posted from my iPhone-
Note: I like my Windows PC a lot and use it everyday. I don't need it for "learning" at all (but can use it).
There's a better algorithm. You don't need to debate whether you are stupid or not. You need to relay zero personal importance to what a rhird party says. In your argument, you are asserting that being stupid is something that can harm you. It cannot because people aren't what they do.
This is true in Argentina, USA or Mexico as far as I have seen. My conclusion is that is that it makes (among other things) them feel less poor. If Obama uses an iPhone, and you have an Phone, you have something in common. Then there's the entertainment factor. They can see the same things as the super rich. In a way, they are competing on equal ground. Of course, it doesn't make sense for an outsider. If i where in that situation, I'd expect progress and see value in making absolutely sure I don't burn a dollar without true need. But the most precious good is TIME itself. When you play console games, or watch a "great" show, you are paying dearly -not how much it costs to access, but the opportunity cost of doing something more rewarding, interesting and valuable for your future.
If people can form companies, people can form syndicates. And there are good and evil companies, and good an evil syndicates. The only problem is that companies can get very big quickly and monopolize, but people are always arguing among themselves. But the true hope is for a monopsony: a monopoly of buying power. That is the true strength of the citizen.It's what Walmart ultimately does. But people could kill any retailer by just -all together- refusing to buy goods/services from them during for a month. People do not realize that they are "a company" off kinds, and can't unite except when pissed of, like when BAC stated that they would charge for having debit accounts, or when Netflix said hey, I am going to double prices.