And this helps how? Do you really want to count votes of people who don't care enough to vote voluntarily? They might just vote randomly or pick the first choice for everything just to get it over with as quickly as possible.
... some of us are thoroughly adjusted to an X- or Windows-style user interface, and don't find it worthwhile to retrain ourselves.
You do realize you can run X-Windows under MacOS X out of the box, right? And you can install KDE, Gnome, or whatever your favorite X-Windows window manager is and run it in rooted mode so you couldn't even tell it was running MacOS X, right? Right?
The feature I want is as follows. Suppose you're channel surfing and come across an interesting show. You'd like to record it, but from the beginning so you see the part you missed. I want to be able to have an option after pressing Record worded like, "Record next rebroadcast in its entirety"
What you have to do now is go back to the Pick Programs to Record screen, search by title, "type" the title, select it, see if the show is being rebroadcast in the near future, and pick one. All the steps are annoying.
If I had what I want, the Tivo would do the search by title immediately and display the upcoming rebroadcasts of the show I'm looking at.
I have a former coworker who now works at Tivo. I've mentioned this feature to her a while ago. Still no luck.:-(
No 802.11, but
this allows you to connect an iPod to an Alpine head unit. (This is the generic version of the iPod/BMW thing.) I'll be getting one of these as soon as it's released. (I also highly recommend Crutchfield as an on-line vendor. I've bought from them several times. They also include extra detailed installation instructions and parts for your car.)
On Cliff's moderation: I posted your exact same question about a year ago and it got rejected.
The court cited the fact that the Internet wasn't listed in the 1991 law....which of course is to be expected since lawmakers would have been unaware of anything called the Internet back in 1991.
Congress is free to amend the ADA by specifically adding a provision for the Internet. You're free to write your repsentatives to urge them to do it.
I believe the idea is to narrow down to a potential pool of candiates
I know fully well what the idea is. My point was that the test they use selects only a single kind of smart person. Yes, Google needs those kind of smart people, but Google also actually has to develop code in-house. Their test throws away people who are great designers and coders but not obscure math problem solvers. What good are lots of bright ideas if you can't implement them well?
The problem is that the ability to answer such questions has nothing really to do with being able to design or implement good software. I've known several really "smart" PhDs who couldn't code for crap. The problem is they really don't care about code. To them, software design and implementation are merely a means to an end: it's not interesting to them in and of itself. Hence, they never bother to learn to get good at it. They hack together prototypes only to solve the (more interesting) problem at hand. It's some of the most awful code you'll ever see.
Then there are people who are great software designers and implementors who have little ability to solve complex/obsure math problems. Google is throwing all those people away.
Then please explain the success of
this.
It's for people too stupid to be able to read and understand their VCR's owners manual.
Speaking from experience, my own father couldn't program the VCR for the longest time. He'd read the words in the manual, but he just didn't "get it." (How he ever was able to read car shop manuals and fix his own car still mystifies me.) I had to show him more times than it takes to train a dog to do anything. The thing that forced him to learn was the fact that I moved out of the house and I wouldn't be there to do it for him. I mean I do love him, but I swear that I think I must be adopted sometimes.
Not on my phone it isn't. The button either ends the call or turns the phone on/off. If it has the feature you describe, the user manual never mentions it.
Regardless, it's irrelevant. I want anonymous-call-rejection. Nothing less.
They aren't talking about the language specification, but the core libraries that ship with the JVM.
Yes I know. It's irrelevant. STL (part of the C++ standard) can't be changed by anybody except the ISO C++ committee. The POSIX API can't be changed by anybody except it's committee. These people who want to change the Java core libraries are asking for special treatment and crying because they don't have it.
Many Java developers are frustrated by the not-so-open process to improve/correct/augment the Java core libraries. Unless you work for Sun or belong to a JSR expert group, there is very little you can do to influence the future of the Java platform.
Huh? This is univerally true for any language: unless you're on the ISO C committee, for example, you have very little influence of the future of the C programming language. Ditto for C++, SQL, XQuery, and every other language with a standard. If you want to have an influence, join a committee!
If patents have "nothing to do with sharing your ideas", then why are you required to disclose them in order to get a patent?
To help prevent others from accidentally using your idea without your permission. If your idea is disclosed to the public, another inventor can't claim, "But I didn't know I was infringing!" in court. It's like a big "No Trespassing" sign where the bounds of where you can't go are clearly marked. Again, patents are to exclude others.
Usually in the field it's all a big case of NIH (Not Invented Here) and people constantly are re-doing stuff that's already been thought through.
How ironic. Just about everything in Java is redone. The syntax is C++ (but not quite); the container classes are sort of, kind of like STL or Rogue Wave (but not quite). The object model is like Smalltalk (but not quite). Java has a big case of NIH since jsut about everything in it is like something else, but was reinvented.
Some things, e.g., paremeterized types, are clearly a good idea, yet Sun chose to omit them for years. And then when they finally were added, the implementation is sub-optimal. (Auto-boxing is NOT a good idea; running on the old JVM is NOT a good goal.)
Patents were recognised to be an artificial construct (and a rather questionable one at that), in which these rights are granted not for your personal benefit, but for the benefit of society as a whole (by encouraging you to share your ideas).
Nope. The idea behind patents is to encourage people to put in a lot of effort to invent something new to benefit society. In return for your hard work, you get a limited monopoly. It has nothing to do with sharing your ideas since nobody is allowed to use them anyway without your permission.
I never said that the purpose of patents is to force you to disclose your idea, it's to encourage its disclosure in exchange for a temporary right to control the use of that idea.
Like I said: people have been sharing ideas for decades in journals. The only incentive to publish there is fame. (Typically, you even have to pay to have your paper published.)
Java is one of the very, very few programming languages ever created which brought no new ideas to programming.
Finally, somebody who "gets it." Even the virtual machine was done earlier by UCSD Pascal (and probably others). I really don't understand why some people are so enamored with Java. It's a mediocre language using recycled syntax and ideas.
The purpose of patents isn't to protect businesses, the purpose is to promote and encourage inventors to share ideas and research rather than keep them to themselves.
No. The sole purpose of a patent is "... the right to exlude others from making, using or selling the invention throughout the United States of America..." That's a direct quote from one of the patent plaques hanging on my wall.
Does a patent force you to disclose your idea? Of course: it's required. But that's not its purpose. Far more people have been sharing ideas for decades through journals (ACM, IEEE, etc.) and not using patents.
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't you actually do some investigation and know what you're talking about before writing?
What you have to do now is go back to the Pick Programs to Record screen, search by title, "type" the title, select it, see if the show is being rebroadcast in the near future, and pick one. All the steps are annoying.
If I had what I want, the Tivo would do the search by title immediately and display the upcoming rebroadcasts of the show I'm looking at.
I have a former coworker who now works at Tivo. I've mentioned this feature to her a while ago. Still no luck. :-(
On Cliff's moderation: I posted your exact same question about a year ago and it got rejected.
But, based on their questions, they don't know applicants can do both.
Then there are people who are great software designers and implementors who have little ability to solve complex/obsure math problems. Google is throwing all those people away.
Speaking from experience, my own father couldn't program the VCR for the longest time. He'd read the words in the manual, but he just didn't "get it." (How he ever was able to read car shop manuals and fix his own car still mystifies me.) I had to show him more times than it takes to train a dog to do anything. The thing that forced him to learn was the fact that I moved out of the house and I wouldn't be there to do it for him. I mean I do love him, but I swear that I think I must be adopted sometimes.
Regardless, it's irrelevant. I want anonymous-call-rejection. Nothing less.
AFAIK, there is no such button on my phone and I've never seen mention of it in my carrier's documentation.
You're forgetting about Brundle-fly. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Some things, e.g., paremeterized types, are clearly a good idea, yet Sun chose to omit them for years. And then when they finally were added, the implementation is sub-optimal. (Auto-boxing is NOT a good idea; running on the old JVM is NOT a good goal.)
Yes? So? Your point? (This doesn't contradict what I said.)
Does a patent force you to disclose your idea? Of course: it's required. But that's not its purpose. Far more people have been sharing ideas for decades through journals (ACM, IEEE, etc.) and not using patents.