Pre-automated? You mean prebuilt with servos to control steering, braking, etc. - the hard part of this competition is not rigging a car so that it *can* be controlled by a computer (if it was, the Mythbusters wouldn't be able to rig a car for remote control every other episode) - it's actually *controlling* the car - Stanford isn't cheating, they just aren't Mech. Engineers, they're CS guys.
More tags for browsers to neglect to implement! No argument here - but I do take issue with your assessment of the <article> tag. The difference between <div class="article"> and <article> is that "<article>" has some implied meaning that a browser will in fact be able to infer, whereas a browser will not (and should not) infer any real meaning from the CSS class.
While this is not terribly relevant to rendering the page in it's original/intended format - i can see it being very useful for indexing and searching blogs, encyclopedia articles, etc., as well as news aggregators, small format browsers (cell phones, etc.), and screen readers. Allowing the browser to "know" what the contents of the tags "mean" in the context of the web page would allow for much more intelligent default behavior when the site is being accessed out of spec.
Jobs talks fast. Much info to convey, little time. Drop most possible words w/o losing meaning. Called "liveblogging".
Unless, of course, you can read/write stenographer's shorthand. Otherwise, I see no other way of of relaying the Stevenote, given that live audio and video wasn't an option.
As I'm sure you are aware, the GP meant is there a language called "African", and I believe the point was that calling Ubuntu an African word is like calling "arigato" an Asian word, or "merci" a European word - I share the GP's distaste at the general tendency (particularly in America) to consider Africa as a single entity, particularly given that this tendency seems to apply *only* to Africa.
Actually Aquafina (a Pepsi product) and it's Coca Cola counterpart Dasani, are generally bottled from tap water local to the market in which it is sold - it keeps their shipping costs nice and low and their profit margins high. After all, who would ship purified tap water across the country?
But what if Apple is simply unsure of it's "mini" OS X the iPhone is running, and would rather field test the OS on a large scale with a more or less perfect knowledge of the the state of all the handsets out in the world. After the remaining kinks are worked out, they can roll out an update to the OS (presumably the software on the phone is upgradeable), and release an SDK. The iPod was without official 3rd party SDKs for quite some time, and, admittedly, the average Joe still can't get access to the iPod SDK, nevertheless, there is now 3rd party software for the iPod.
So who knows? It may take another hardware revision before Apple is ready to allow 3rd parties into their phone, or maybe just a software update.
Even if Apple shipped a machine with no OS installed - you'd still be paying for OS X by purchasing it. Apple subsidizes their OS development with profits from their hardware division.
Taking the easy route seems to be the RIAA legal team's MO. Another poster mentioned that a judge questioned their filing of a joint civil action against John Doe's 1-21, when a joint action can only be justified by evidence of conspiracy or collusion between the accused - the RIAA filed jointly to save themselves the money and aggravation of 21 separate filings, in spite of it's invalidity.
That's a fair point - although I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of cell phone customers buy the discounted phone with a one or two year contract. I know personally it meant the difference between $200 and $500 for my Treo - and while yes, it can suck to be locked into a contract, most of the time it's not terribly onerous.
This is a particularly interesting point - the general legal standing seems to be that the use of an unsecured wifi AP without the explicit permission of it's owner is illegal, the presumption being that not securing your AP does not imply consent. If we apply this concept to a publicly accessible shared folder - shouldn't not securing it also not imply consent, thereby placing the responsibility in the hands of the person accessing the shared folder?
Admittedly, it could (and has been in other posts) be argued that the default state of a folder on a network is not shared. My thought on that is that the default state of a wireless AP is unplugged - and plugging it in does not imply consent to public access.
Furthermore, can it not be argued that an unsecured shared folder can be used strictly for personal use, just like an unsecured wifi hotspot? If I have multiple machines all connected to the BU network, and I want to access my music from all of them - am I required to secure my shared folder in order to avoid copyright infringement? Essentially - it all boils down to intent, and I don't believe that intent to encourage infringement can be established without an explicit public advertisement of the share - i.e. posting a file to a p2p site, or putting fliers all over campus saying "Download my music! Go to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX to leech off my music collection!."
An Apple cop-out. Application development means things like ssh programs, or irc clients, or spreadsheets, or VOIP programs, not silly javascript toys. Take a look at some of the widgets available for mac os x - many of them are compact, but nevertheless quite fully featured applications, including, but not limited too, terminals, vnc clients, and yep - 3D video games. I can't speak to what kind of object code will be allowed on the iPhone, but while the controller code may be javascript, widgets in the operating system are far more than silly javascript toys.
no app development We know this to no longer be true - 3rd party apps for the iphone can and will be created using methods similar to the way widgets are developed for os x. As to contracts.....why is everybody whining about contracts? *Every* phone that is not a prepaid phone requires a contract, and nearly all of them have draconian cancellation fees - why don't we wait until we have the actual details of the contract, rather than the word of an anonymous AT&T store manager.
Well according to the NCAA Terms and Conditions for Use of Credentials:
Real-time transmission of streaming video, digital images, real-time audio, including play-by-play and statistics, of any game of the championship is exclusive to the NCAA's Web site and/or any other Web site designated by the NCAA and its rightsholders. "Real-time" is defined as "live, continuous play-by-play or description of an event." Additionally:
The use of any account, description, picture, photograph, video, audio, reproduction, or other information concerning the Events (the "Event Information") other than for news coverage of, or magazines, books or stories about, the Events, or for First Amendment- protected purposes, is prohibited, except (a) with the prior written consent of the NCAA or (b) as specifically licensed herein. Nothing in these terms and conditions authorizes or allows Bearer to violate any of the NCAA trademarks, copyright and other proprietary rights. This all seems to me to be a bit ambiguous (although IANAL). The NCAA acknowledges that there are First Amendment protections afforded to journalists who have been issued press credentials, without enumerating them, and at the same time prohibits Real-time transmission of "live, continuous play-by-play or description of the event", without in fact defining the term play-by-play. I could very well just be nitpicking, but what, exactly, constitutes play by play reporting? Must I report the result of every play in basketball in order for my reporting to be considered play by play? Or do highlights of particularly important plays (baskets, fouls) meet the criteria? What exactly is protected speech for a journalist with press credentials at an NCAA game? Without knowing the answer to these questions (even after reading the terms and conditions), how can you say whether or not the other side of that argument is valid? Perhaps you can cite the answers to some of these questions.
Indeed. Stephen Jay Gould wrote a fantastic essay called Nonoverlapping Magisteria on this subject. His point was that religion and science are essentially orthogonal domains of knowledge, and as such should stay the hell away from one other. Also interesting - Gould mentioned a statement issued by Pope John Paul II entitled Truth Cannot Contradict Truth, which confirmed the catholic church's official position on evolution - it does not conflict with theology.
Yeah, the freeware point was the one that seemed to me to be the most ridiculous. I've found the average quality of free- and donation-ware on mac os x is *much* higher than on windows, and very often, the first tool I download for a job does it very well. On windows (assuming I have a task for which I have not yet found a good freeware tool) finding the right tool can involve trying dozens of different solutions before I find one that works as advertised.
And one further point - the *only* machine that it's a pain to install RAM in is the mini - every other machine (Apple TV excluded) is a piece of cake.
That's a fair point - but if the FCC is mandating the V-Chip, why then are they also enforcing censorship? Frankly, I don't give a crap what's being broadcast - I have no children in my house and if I find something offensive on television (like the Fox news channel) i just change the channel. If I were concerned about scarring the minds of small children - i'd make sure the TV filtered out content labelled TV-MA. If the issue is really about "think of the children", a system is already standardized and in place to "protect" them (should their parents choose to do so) - why do we need an additional layer of "protection"?
And the real kicker is that a bomb, should some city in the US fall victim to one, is going to be precisely that: a ladies' handbag, a cardboard box, or even a pile of trash (as a number of IEDs in Iraq were). What it sure as hell isn't going to be is a bloody lighted sign placed in a location visible to any/all passersby. If you want the bomb to stay in one place until detonation, in an area that gets high people traffic - would you put a whole bunch of leds in the shape of a pop culture icon on the fucking outside of it? Sure, maybe one or two discreet leds to show armed/unarmed status. Surely the one thing we should have learned from the many Al Qaeda sponsored terrorist attacks around the world is that these people are not idiots. If they're smart enough to con an otherwise reasonable person into blowing themselves up, and they're smart enough to build a massive, worldwide, decentralized terrorist organization, then they're abso-fucking-lutely smart enough to conceal a bomb in an urban environment. I'm pretty sure that a number of the higher-ups in the "war on terror" underestimated the capabilities of Al Qaeda et al, even after 9/11, simply because a large majority of them come from so-called "third world countries" and more or less lack formal (as in western style university/corporate/military) training. And yet, the engineering and combat tactics by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan have continuously and dramatically improved.
Frankly, this whole post can be summed up as me yelling "Learn some fucking common sense!" at the current administration (yes, yes, this was Boston local government - but it was the Bush administration that injected them with fear and paranoia), but I suppose I should know better, given that anyone actively seeking (and attaining) high public office is already clearly lacking a common sense gland.
*to the parent*: btw, didn't mean to get all serious in reply to your comment - it was hilarious. One question though - who carries a rubber chicken in their pocket?:-P.
{begins waiting for examples of "big" companies that use macs in numbers greater than 90%} How about Apple?
Re:Ruby as a first language?
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
Heh. Don't get me wrong, I love perl; particularly because of how intuitive it is (at least for me). What I find to be perl's biggest flaw is that while, yes, it is intuitive to many people the perl that I write is almost a different language from the perl that everybody else writes - which helps make it an intuitive language, but at the same time makes it hard as hell to read somebody else's perl code; which, in a production environment is simple unacceptable.
Thanks for the info. My one quibble right now is whether or not Iraqi Kurdistan should even be considered part of Iraq at this point. Given what I've read, it seems that the (remarkably separate) Iraqi Kurdistan government has done a great job of keeping the peace. While I can't speak to the situation pre-war, it seems to me that Iraqi Kurdistan would be the more organized party, simply as a result of it's separatism and relative cultural homogeneity. Then again, they could have their shit together simply because they've been influenced the least by the American government. Not that I'm saying anything negative about America's ability to meddle oversees...oh wait, yes I am.
Re:Ruby as a first language?
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
Perl is great for sysadmin scripts (actually, though, so is Ruby) - what it's not great for is huge website projects (unless your a masochist - slashcode, i'm looking at you). The problem with Perl and PHP for large web projects is that even with decent project management, one bad programmer can make problems for the whole team a few months down the line after deployment. The thing I like about rails is that it forces the developer into good code-separation practices, which is a very Good Thing when you've got developers on your team with little formal training.
Slashdot Mirror
Pre-automated? You mean prebuilt with servos to control steering, braking, etc. - the hard part of this competition is not rigging a car so that it *can* be controlled by a computer (if it was, the Mythbusters wouldn't be able to rig a car for remote control every other episode) - it's actually *controlling* the car - Stanford isn't cheating, they just aren't Mech. Engineers, they're CS guys.
While this is not terribly relevant to rendering the page in it's original/intended format - i can see it being very useful for indexing and searching blogs, encyclopedia articles, etc., as well as news aggregators, small format browsers (cell phones, etc.), and screen readers. Allowing the browser to "know" what the contents of the tags "mean" in the context of the web page would allow for much more intelligent default behavior when the site is being accessed out of spec.
Jobs talks fast. Much info to convey, little time. Drop most possible words w/o losing meaning. Called "liveblogging".
Unless, of course, you can read/write stenographer's shorthand. Otherwise, I see no other way of of relaying the Stevenote, given that live audio and video wasn't an option.
Umm...I think it's highly unlikely that the radio will be on when the phone is being updated.
As I'm sure you are aware, the GP meant is there a language called "African", and I believe the point was that calling Ubuntu an African word is like calling "arigato" an Asian word, or "merci" a European word - I share the GP's distaste at the general tendency (particularly in America) to consider Africa as a single entity, particularly given that this tendency seems to apply *only* to Africa.
But then, that's just how I see it.
Actually Aquafina (a Pepsi product) and it's Coca Cola counterpart Dasani, are generally bottled from tap water local to the market in which it is sold - it keeps their shipping costs nice and low and their profit margins high. After all, who would ship purified tap water across the country?
But what if Apple is simply unsure of it's "mini" OS X the iPhone is running, and would rather field test the OS on a large scale with a more or less perfect knowledge of the the state of all the handsets out in the world. After the remaining kinks are worked out, they can roll out an update to the OS (presumably the software on the phone is upgradeable), and release an SDK. The iPod was without official 3rd party SDKs for quite some time, and, admittedly, the average Joe still can't get access to the iPod SDK, nevertheless, there is now 3rd party software for the iPod.
So who knows? It may take another hardware revision before Apple is ready to allow 3rd parties into their phone, or maybe just a software update.
Even if Apple shipped a machine with no OS installed - you'd still be paying for OS X by purchasing it. Apple subsidizes their OS development with profits from their hardware division.
Taking the easy route seems to be the RIAA legal team's MO. Another poster mentioned that a judge questioned their filing of a joint civil action against John Doe's 1-21, when a joint action can only be justified by evidence of conspiracy or collusion between the accused - the RIAA filed jointly to save themselves the money and aggravation of 21 separate filings, in spite of it's invalidity.
That's a fair point - although I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of cell phone customers buy the discounted phone with a one or two year contract. I know personally it meant the difference between $200 and $500 for my Treo - and while yes, it can suck to be locked into a contract, most of the time it's not terribly onerous.
This is a particularly interesting point - the general legal standing seems to be that the use of an unsecured wifi AP without the explicit permission of it's owner is illegal, the presumption being that not securing your AP does not imply consent. If we apply this concept to a publicly accessible shared folder - shouldn't not securing it also not imply consent, thereby placing the responsibility in the hands of the person accessing the shared folder?
Admittedly, it could (and has been in other posts) be argued that the default state of a folder on a network is not shared. My thought on that is that the default state of a wireless AP is unplugged - and plugging it in does not imply consent to public access.
Furthermore, can it not be argued that an unsecured shared folder can be used strictly for personal use, just like an unsecured wifi hotspot? If I have multiple machines all connected to the BU network, and I want to access my music from all of them - am I required to secure my shared folder in order to avoid copyright infringement? Essentially - it all boils down to intent, and I don't believe that intent to encourage infringement can be established without an explicit public advertisement of the share - i.e. posting a file to a p2p site, or putting fliers all over campus saying "Download my music! Go to XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX to leech off my music collection!."
No it's not - it is in fact 1/20th (obviously a totally rough estimate) the size of a ps3. Miniaturization is expensive!
Indeed. Stephen Jay Gould wrote a fantastic essay called Nonoverlapping Magisteria on this subject. His point was that religion and science are essentially orthogonal domains of knowledge, and as such should stay the hell away from one other. Also interesting - Gould mentioned a statement issued by Pope John Paul II entitled Truth Cannot Contradict Truth, which confirmed the catholic church's official position on evolution - it does not conflict with theology.
Yeah, the freeware point was the one that seemed to me to be the most ridiculous. I've found the average quality of free- and donation-ware on mac os x is *much* higher than on windows, and very often, the first tool I download for a job does it very well. On windows (assuming I have a task for which I have not yet found a good freeware tool) finding the right tool can involve trying dozens of different solutions before I find one that works as advertised.
And one further point - the *only* machine that it's a pain to install RAM in is the mini - every other machine (Apple TV excluded) is a piece of cake.
That's a fair point - but if the FCC is mandating the V-Chip, why then are they also enforcing censorship? Frankly, I don't give a crap what's being broadcast - I have no children in my house and if I find something offensive on television (like the Fox news channel) i just change the channel. If I were concerned about scarring the minds of small children - i'd make sure the TV filtered out content labelled TV-MA. If the issue is really about "think of the children", a system is already standardized and in place to "protect" them (should their parents choose to do so) - why do we need an additional layer of "protection"?
And the real kicker is that a bomb, should some city in the US fall victim to one, is going to be precisely that: a ladies' handbag, a cardboard box, or even a pile of trash (as a number of IEDs in Iraq were). What it sure as hell isn't going to be is a bloody lighted sign placed in a location visible to any/all passersby. If you want the bomb to stay in one place until detonation, in an area that gets high people traffic - would you put a whole bunch of leds in the shape of a pop culture icon on the fucking outside of it? Sure, maybe one or two discreet leds to show armed/unarmed status. Surely the one thing we should have learned from the many Al Qaeda sponsored terrorist attacks around the world is that these people are not idiots. If they're smart enough to con an otherwise reasonable person into blowing themselves up, and they're smart enough to build a massive, worldwide, decentralized terrorist organization, then they're abso-fucking-lutely smart enough to conceal a bomb in an urban environment. I'm pretty sure that a number of the higher-ups in the "war on terror" underestimated the capabilities of Al Qaeda et al, even after 9/11, simply because a large majority of them come from so-called "third world countries" and more or less lack formal (as in western style university/corporate/military) training. And yet, the engineering and combat tactics by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan have continuously and dramatically improved.
:-P.
Frankly, this whole post can be summed up as me yelling "Learn some fucking common sense!" at the current administration (yes, yes, this was Boston local government - but it was the Bush administration that injected them with fear and paranoia), but I suppose I should know better, given that anyone actively seeking (and attaining) high public office is already clearly lacking a common sense gland.
*to the parent*: btw, didn't mean to get all serious in reply to your comment - it was hilarious. One question though - who carries a rubber chicken in their pocket?
Heh. Don't get me wrong, I love perl; particularly because of how intuitive it is (at least for me). What I find to be perl's biggest flaw is that while, yes, it is intuitive to many people the perl that I write is almost a different language from the perl that everybody else writes - which helps make it an intuitive language, but at the same time makes it hard as hell to read somebody else's perl code; which, in a production environment is simple unacceptable.
Thanks for the info. My one quibble right now is whether or not Iraqi Kurdistan should even be considered part of Iraq at this point. Given what I've read, it seems that the (remarkably separate) Iraqi Kurdistan government has done a great job of keeping the peace. While I can't speak to the situation pre-war, it seems to me that Iraqi Kurdistan would be the more organized party, simply as a result of it's separatism and relative cultural homogeneity. Then again, they could have their shit together simply because they've been influenced the least by the American government. Not that I'm saying anything negative about America's ability to meddle oversees...oh wait, yes I am.
No no no, pine is for the fjords.
Perl is great for sysadmin scripts (actually, though, so is Ruby) - what it's not great for is huge website projects (unless your a masochist - slashcode, i'm looking at you). The problem with Perl and PHP for large web projects is that even with decent project management, one bad programmer can make problems for the whole team a few months down the line after deployment. The thing I like about rails is that it forces the developer into good code-separation practices, which is a very Good Thing when you've got developers on your team with little formal training.