I for one don't watch the show anymore, and did find this interesting. However I am sure that all those who haven't seen it yet (ever hear of time zones?) will really appreciate this "news item";)
Why on earth do you need to read source code to be a sysadmin? Hell, our sysadmin can barely read at all, and the place is still running. Are you like the FUD consumer of the year?
It also has neat features like that "Message Center", which is smart enough that it cannot be disabled, or else silly people like me would miss out on all those "Critical Updates", and we wouldn't want that, now would we?
Yeah, we damn russian hackers just can't knock it off, I mean I even hack into my development server every time, instead of just logging in. It's a good thing I'm a lousy admin, though, so it's usually pretty easy.
Also a perfect example of the fate that awaits a person who underestimates technology and our voracious appetite for it.
Apparently that fate is to create the company that completely dominates the entire industry and become one of richest people in the world in the process? Yeah, serves him right.
Anyway, repeating the same criticism of someone over and over again only shows how very little you can fault them on.
Why only one life time? Certainly other people's lifetimes (or parts of them) as well as fictional ones will be interesting to you as well? And why human senses? There will be applications that need more precision than that... I agree with you, I just think the bar is a little higher still.
And I mean, who needs 120TB of random access storage?Right now, probably no one, unless they are archiving the net or something. Fairly soon it will be scientists, sometime after that artists (around which time this sort of capacity will probably start getting on the desktop), after that pr0n collectors and gamers and around the same time developers. At least that's what I would think, if there is one thing that time has show is that statements like "who could ever need that much <computer aspect>?" are usually shown wrong after some time. Besides if I can think of applications requiring this now, certainly the need will come along sooner or later.
Also, since when is it being nice not reason enough to have something? I mean we are chargin ahead with this whole computer innovation thing, not just struggling to get by.
That's not quite what he was talking about. Almost everybody has heard of Stephen King, but certainly not all of those people have read any of his "work". The argument goes that a person is more likely to read the book for free first and then go out and buy other books, then to just shell out for the book to begin with. Getting people to pay for what they are getting for free anyway is a completely different, and stupid, concept.
Of course the problem here is that most popular and well known authors and "artists" (including your very fitting examples) are just plain shit, and no one in their right mind would buy them because they actually think they are good. That's the reason this sort of thing wouldn't work for the mainstream.
would the supporting structure being a steel frame make it a completely different device to one that used a tree as a supporting structure?
It's only a new, patentable device if a computer is somehow involved at some point. Like, if you were looking at a computer while swinging, or were thinking about a computer.
What's the suggestion we always hear when we are lacking any form of "power" for some task? Distribute it! So I am suggesting that we replace the USPTO with Patent@Home, where all patent applications will be randomly distributed between the participants to be approved or rejected. It might seem that giving the decision to 14 year old kids with no kind of training on the subject is a bad idea... but then, look at the parent.
Well they obviously don't have the manpower to read all the patents, so they probably do something similar to the IRS - approve everything that comes in (maybe check for a minimum lenght and minimum number of words longer than 5 syllables) and then "audit" a small random selection... you know by reading them.
Don't forget "inventive" which is far harder to achieve than any of the things you listed, and most people seem to have forgotten that it's part of the requirements for soemthing to be patentable.
Slashdot Mirror
what's that? off-topic yet again? blow me, topic gendarmes.
Yeah, I lasted less than an hour with the whole blackout thing... seriously, I cracked and checked /. at about 0:46
aren't we always the ones to yell that it's not the technology, but how you use it, that counts? just saying...
Wow, nothing could've brought home the fact that sci-fi on tv sucks now, like that one sentence.
I for one don't watch the show anymore, and did find this interesting. However I am sure that all those who haven't seen it yet (ever hear of time zones?) will really appreciate this "news item" ;)
Why on earth do you need to read source code to be a sysadmin? Hell, our sysadmin can barely read at all, and the place is still running. Are you like the FUD consumer of the year?
umm, yeah, by 5,000 people.
It also has neat features like that "Message Center", which is smart enough that it cannot be disabled, or else silly people like me would miss out on all those "Critical Updates", and we wouldn't want that, now would we?
Yeah, we damn russian hackers just can't knock it off, I mean I even hack into my development server every time, instead of just logging in. It's a good thing I'm a lousy admin, though, so it's usually pretty easy.
and that's on fridays, after work, and against most people you work with, including your boss.
I thought they were talking about some Chinese GNU/Linux distro for like the first half of the article...
Apparently that fate is to create the company that completely dominates the entire industry and become one of richest people in the world in the process? Yeah, serves him right.
Anyway, repeating the same criticism of someone over and over again only shows how very little you can fault them on.
Why only one life time? Certainly other people's lifetimes (or parts of them) as well as fictional ones will be interesting to you as well? And why human senses? There will be applications that need more precision than that... I agree with you, I just think the bar is a little higher still.
Gods, will you give it a rest? That was how many years ago?
Also, since when is it being nice not reason enough to have something? I mean we are chargin ahead with this whole computer innovation thing, not just struggling to get by.
Mmmm.... future pr0n.
Of course the problem here is that most popular and well known authors and "artists" (including your very fitting examples) are just plain shit, and no one in their right mind would buy them because they actually think they are good. That's the reason this sort of thing wouldn't work for the mainstream.
whom. whom to elect.
you are, of course, a psychologist?
of course. but not legally arrested.
It's only a new, patentable device if a computer is somehow involved at some point. Like, if you were looking at a computer while swinging, or were thinking about a computer.
You can't actually be arested over IP (for now at least).
What's the suggestion we always hear when we are lacking any form of "power" for some task? Distribute it! So I am suggesting that we replace the USPTO with Patent@Home, where all patent applications will be randomly distributed between the participants to be approved or rejected. It might seem that giving the decision to 14 year old kids with no kind of training on the subject is a bad idea... but then, look at the parent.
Well they obviously don't have the manpower to read all the patents, so they probably do something similar to the IRS - approve everything that comes in (maybe check for a minimum lenght and minimum number of words longer than 5 syllables) and then "audit" a small random selection... you know by reading them.
Don't forget "inventive" which is far harder to achieve than any of the things you listed, and most people seem to have forgotten that it's part of the requirements for soemthing to be patentable.