If I go the speed limit in my area, I'll get rear ended. The speed limts in my area's highway are set 10mph lower than average people actually go, seemingly put in as a way for cops to rake in cash.
Everyone on this thread is acting like they never exceed the speed limit and are perfect little angels at driving and exceeding it is some moralely repugnant act and that bullshit is extremely annoying.
We have this collective modern notion that someone gets a great idea and then makes millions off of it. That's simply not how it works in most cases, it never really did and that's what makes patent trolls and the system that rewards them so egregious - they do the 1% at most (and more than likely not buy it or simply take a preexisting idea) and leech off those that do the other 99%.
Well, there will be people who say the iPod was nothing special (I'm not one of them) because of mp3 players existing before then. But both of you are forgetting about the iPad - first real successful tablet in that form.
But I think the problem is that technology levels make some items inevitable and we're really waiting for technology to advance for the next big idea to manifest. Not so much the next big idea itself. Unless they can replace our eyeballs with an attractive replacement that also acts as a phone, camera, and HUD... convergence technology is pretty limited right now to what we have - a phone, tape recorder, gps, browser, camera, etc in our pockets.
Everything from there will be an evolution until that eyeball form factor is feasible.
Otherwise it's like waiting for the next big idea on the desktop in 1985 (when the 386 was released). Milestones (integrated soundcard, etc) came and went but the next big revolutionary idea never came. Evolution came. We went far since then. Looking back, home computing seems like a revolution. But it's one revolution, lots of little evolutions.
The next big idea (www and internet for the common man) did, but it was not strictly a desktop thing imo. But again, www is the revolution. Lots of evolutions since then to make the web page of 1993 look antique.
No one recognized the Year of Linux having come and possibly passed, because it was in the pocket, not the desktop.
Back in 1999, this breakup may have been a good idea, comply with the Court monopolistic findings and make 2 much more agile companies.
But what is the point now? The techscape is very different and Microsoft's woes is mostly the result of internal bureacracy that built up complying with that now obsolete order. Get rid of the bureaucracy, not split the company. At worst, it goes to court and I find it very hard that MS will lose.
What MS needs is leadership that's more adventurous than "Look! Me too!" and backed by MS's considerable but ever slowly dwindling resources. In the last 15 years, all they added for themselves on top of the OS and Office was Xbox. The problem long term for MS is that the desktop is now old hat and it has no share in mobile. On top of that, for most users, Operating Systems will be given ever less importance to the end user. Already, I have friends who do their Quickbooks and Intuit taxes online with just a browser. Something they couldn't do 15 years back. They use one of the free office softwares and edit pics with another free program that's better than 90% of the pay programs. Their OS at this point couldn't matter less and that's how they like it. All that matters is their data and being able to manipulate it. 15 years ago, it was unfathomable to get on in the world with anything but Windows. Now you can get along with minimum 3 OSes.
MS's OS (and it's wealth) comes at considerable cost to others. License fees ratchet up every so often and what now. If other industries/companies can do away with a cost, they will. And that means eventually dumping Microsoft. Especially when this expensive commodity can be replaced for free. With Chromebook, this is creeping in. 15 years ago, this was unfathomable and crap like Lindows was a joke from a 3rd tier company no one heard of. Because Ballmer was right - it's about the applications, stupid. Developers and all that.
Ironically, that's exactly what MS now lacks in the mobile arena. They lost at their own game. They're suffering the same problem Linux had on the desktop - marketshare. With the Microsoft Zune, they skated to where the puck was, not where it was going. Taste that, friends, because that's just sweet. Now that OS agnostic world is on the horizon, Windows becoming a niche among professionals and gamers but no longer synonymous with computing, or even desktop computing.
Who knew? The Year of Linux on the Desktop will probably come when the OS couldn't matter one bit anymore and for that very reason.
So the only people that should be cloned are either athletes, models and porn actors/actresses.
Porn "stars" probably should not be cloned because a lot of the value in a porn star is the novelty factor. The industry eats them up and spits them out. There's enough attractive people in the world willing to suck dick on camera for it to have next to no value.
Besides, there's no need for real bodies, within 20 years mainstream porn will probably be entirely simulation, something like Hatsune Miku. User gets to direct the action, studios will make money on the upgrades like outfits, and won't have to pay the actress except a one time scanning fee. Studios will also be able to keep "actresses" exclusive and build brand name stars like comic books.
Ok, I'm going to have to yell bullshit on this. I know enough startup bands in my time in highschol and college and many dreamed of getting signed onto a record and making it big.
The problem is always framing it in what the artist wants. Well, I'm sure my bricklayer/plumber/carpenter/electrician would love to get paid for the houses they built the rest of their lives, but they settle for a one time payment. We know what the artists want, they want as much for themselves as they can get while being able to copy/borrow/steal from their peers and predecessors with impunity.
If we see societal protection as an actual cost, which it is, the question becomes how much do we extend to promote the arts and sciences. I believe the average artist is about as concerned about getting locked-in royalties for his great grandkids as the average bricklayer, which is about 0, unless it's the icing on the cake. Therefore, we can retract societal protections to be much more reasonable lengths of time, and hell, keeping the artist a little on the meager side might light a fire under their asses.
Just to nitpick but Google is only 15 years old, not twenty.
I would agree about other ideas being mature. Gmail was/used to be great in it's simplicity (just like google search was) but they keep adding bells and whistle and stupid shit. I wish I could have both back minus the added bullshit.
I asked my 85 year old great-uncle, and he told you to go fuck yourself. If he could live as a 25 year old for 75 years and drop dead, he'd take the option.
I might be wrong since I'm only going by what I'm reading and have yet to use a Roku box myself but I'm continually surprised that you can't stream the channels that you can pick up over the air for free, especially with the HD conversion. It seem counterintuitive that free channels don't go as many avenues as possible. If that were to occur, I would think that + netflix would be enough for a good plurality of people.
Analogies are valuable teaching tool to visual complex mechanisms by relating them to a hopefully familiar form. This situation needs none. It's not very complex and everyone who reads up on it should know what's going one. In this case, the analogy ceases to be a teaching tool in this instance but a propaganda weapon in how it is cast. And worse than that, it's a propaganda weapon on the 4th grade level. If that is the average level of the electorate, forget about having a democracy or a democratic republic.
As for the Kindle Paperwhite....I read that there is little difference between reflected light (off a page) and one coming from behind a page like paper white. Of course, you can do something like not have enough ambient lighting and it would be like staring at a (low powered) light bulb in a dark room, but barring that, why would there be eyestrain and headaches? Of course, there's no constant refresh rates of the text like a LCD screen, except for the backlights which all CFL/LED lighting is subject to. I assume people can read at night with energy saving lightbulb without too much bother?
The real reason to me to get a kindle over a table for reading is simply the weight difference. The tablets I held would be uncomfortable compared to a 6" kindle which easily weighs the same as or less than a fiction paperback.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that will really make me feel better when I waste my time in court, especially with a guy without insurance which is fairly common here.
"Oh, at least I was following the law."
0 fucking common sense.
If I go the speed limit in my area, I'll get rear ended. The speed limts in my area's highway are set 10mph lower than average people actually go, seemingly put in as a way for cops to rake in cash.
When people follow the speed limit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoETMCosULQ
Everyone on this thread is acting like they never exceed the speed limit and are perfect little angels at driving and exceeding it is some moralely repugnant act and that bullshit is extremely annoying.
Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.
We have this collective modern notion that someone gets a great idea and then makes millions off of it. That's simply not how it works in most cases, it never really did and that's what makes patent trolls and the system that rewards them so egregious - they do the 1% at most (and more than likely not buy it or simply take a preexisting idea) and leech off those that do the other 99%.
Because Middle Eastern Weapon Stockpiles were always so secure.
Also, I suspect Iraq may be an easy source.
Putin will put out!
Well, there will be people who say the iPod was nothing special (I'm not one of them) because of mp3 players existing before then. But both of you are forgetting about the iPad - first real successful tablet in that form.
But I think the problem is that technology levels make some items inevitable and we're really waiting for technology to advance for the next big idea to manifest. Not so much the next big idea itself. Unless they can replace our eyeballs with an attractive replacement that also acts as a phone, camera, and HUD... convergence technology is pretty limited right now to what we have - a phone, tape recorder, gps, browser, camera, etc in our pockets.
Everything from there will be an evolution until that eyeball form factor is feasible.
Otherwise it's like waiting for the next big idea on the desktop in 1985 (when the 386 was released). Milestones (integrated soundcard, etc) came and went but the next big revolutionary idea never came. Evolution came. We went far since then. Looking back, home computing seems like a revolution. But it's one revolution, lots of little evolutions.
The next big idea (www and internet for the common man) did, but it was not strictly a desktop thing imo. But again, www is the revolution. Lots of evolutions since then to make the web page of 1993 look antique.
No one recognized the Year of Linux having come and possibly passed, because it was in the pocket, not the desktop.
Back in 1999, this breakup may have been a good idea, comply with the Court monopolistic findings and make 2 much more agile companies.
But what is the point now? The techscape is very different and Microsoft's woes is mostly the result of internal bureacracy that built up complying with that now obsolete order. Get rid of the bureaucracy, not split the company. At worst, it goes to court and I find it very hard that MS will lose.
What MS needs is leadership that's more adventurous than "Look! Me too!" and backed by MS's considerable but ever slowly dwindling resources. In the last 15 years, all they added for themselves on top of the OS and Office was Xbox. The problem long term for MS is that the desktop is now old hat and it has no share in mobile. On top of that, for most users, Operating Systems will be given ever less importance to the end user. Already, I have friends who do their Quickbooks and Intuit taxes online with just a browser. Something they couldn't do 15 years back. They use one of the free office softwares and edit pics with another free program that's better than 90% of the pay programs. Their OS at this point couldn't matter less and that's how they like it. All that matters is their data and being able to manipulate it. 15 years ago, it was unfathomable to get on in the world with anything but Windows. Now you can get along with minimum 3 OSes.
MS's OS (and it's wealth) comes at considerable cost to others. License fees ratchet up every so often and what now. If other industries/companies can do away with a cost, they will. And that means eventually dumping Microsoft. Especially when this expensive commodity can be replaced for free. With Chromebook, this is creeping in. 15 years ago, this was unfathomable and crap like Lindows was a joke from a 3rd tier company no one heard of. Because Ballmer was right - it's about the applications, stupid. Developers and all that.
Ironically, that's exactly what MS now lacks in the mobile arena. They lost at their own game. They're suffering the same problem Linux had on the desktop - marketshare. With the Microsoft Zune, they skated to where the puck was, not where it was going. Taste that, friends, because that's just sweet. Now that OS agnostic world is on the horizon, Windows becoming a niche among professionals and gamers but no longer synonymous with computing, or even desktop computing.
Who knew? The Year of Linux on the Desktop will probably come when the OS couldn't matter one bit anymore and for that very reason.
Wait, you actually want the computer to override you while you're driving? I don't think it should work that way.
If you asked that question in the early 1950s, I'm sure it would have similiar results and apprehensions.
I'm on slashdot, I don't read articles, I absorb them through osmosis.
Here we come.
Or the torture (solitary confinement) really got to him.
Third possibility, 35 years in the brig, he wants to go to woman's prison and be able to bang some chicks.
Porn "stars" probably should not be cloned because a lot of the value in a porn star is the novelty factor. The industry eats them up and spits them out. There's enough attractive people in the world willing to suck dick on camera for it to have next to no value.
Besides, there's no need for real bodies, within 20 years mainstream porn will probably be entirely simulation, something like Hatsune Miku. User gets to direct the action, studios will make money on the upgrades like outfits, and won't have to pay the actress except a one time scanning fee. Studios will also be able to keep "actresses" exclusive and build brand name stars like comic books.
And? We're at similiar Ghz to back then but not because we want to be.
I know I'm not a special snowflake and certainly no one in my highschool, so I find it reasonable to extrapolate it out.
Now who is projecting? :)
Ok, I'm going to have to yell bullshit on this. I know enough startup bands in my time in highschol and college and many dreamed of getting signed onto a record and making it big.
The problem is always framing it in what the artist wants. Well, I'm sure my bricklayer/plumber/carpenter/electrician would love to get paid for the houses they built the rest of their lives, but they settle for a one time payment. We know what the artists want, they want as much for themselves as they can get while being able to copy/borrow/steal from their peers and predecessors with impunity.
If we see societal protection as an actual cost, which it is, the question becomes how much do we extend to promote the arts and sciences. I believe the average artist is about as concerned about getting locked-in royalties for his great grandkids as the average bricklayer, which is about 0, unless it's the icing on the cake. Therefore, we can retract societal protections to be much more reasonable lengths of time, and hell, keeping the artist a little on the meager side might light a fire under their asses.
Well, at least I'm not the only one who appreciates a computer's relative unambiguity (aside the ones programmed into it).
Just to nitpick but Google is only 15 years old, not twenty.
I would agree about other ideas being mature. Gmail was/used to be great in it's simplicity (just like google search was) but they keep adding bells and whistle and stupid shit. I wish I could have both back minus the added bullshit.
But those shareholders don't have real power compared to the long term invested who vote and the big players in the long terms.
I asked my 85 year old great-uncle, and he told you to go fuck yourself. If he could live as a 25 year old for 75 years and drop dead, he'd take the option.
Metacritic and Rotten don't seem to be encouraging this movie.
I might be wrong since I'm only going by what I'm reading and have yet to use a Roku box myself but I'm continually surprised that you can't stream the channels that you can pick up over the air for free, especially with the HD conversion. It seem counterintuitive that free channels don't go as many avenues as possible. If that were to occur, I would think that + netflix would be enough for a good plurality of people.
Maybe cut that obesity rate down and you can solve some hunger issues at the same time. And cut ethanol while you're at it.
Analogies are valuable teaching tool to visual complex mechanisms by relating them to a hopefully familiar form. This situation needs none. It's not very complex and everyone who reads up on it should know what's going one. In this case, the analogy ceases to be a teaching tool in this instance but a propaganda weapon in how it is cast. And worse than that, it's a propaganda weapon on the 4th grade level. If that is the average level of the electorate, forget about having a democracy or a democratic republic.
You can adjust the brightness of the Kindle Paperwhite.
As for the Kindle Paperwhite....I read that there is little difference between reflected light (off a page) and one coming from behind a page like paper white. Of course, you can do something like not have enough ambient lighting and it would be like staring at a (low powered) light bulb in a dark room, but barring that, why would there be eyestrain and headaches? Of course, there's no constant refresh rates of the text like a LCD screen, except for the backlights which all CFL/LED lighting is subject to. I assume people can read at night with energy saving lightbulb without too much bother?
The real reason to me to get a kindle over a table for reading is simply the weight difference. The tablets I held would be uncomfortable compared to a 6" kindle which easily weighs the same as or less than a fiction paperback.