What's brave about this? If I kicked your door in and ran into your living room and screamed motherfucker in your face,
Nice straw man. It's subversive when the act is both illegal, and the law is considered unjust. The act they are doing isn't anti-social, and not comparable to what you claim.
Indeed, they're the ones who risk having their door kicked down (by the police), which is what makes it brave.
The magistrate allowed me to carry on on religious grounds. I carried on pointing out the holes in the case and cleared my name, thankful that I was never asked if I actually believed in any of that god stuff.
Yes, that bit does sound quite bizarre - he let you carry on on religious grounds, but not on the grounds of justice, you know, what the whole point of the court is for...
It can be a pain, but I don't think this is any different to having to have copies of mp3s/videos on your Ipod as well as on your desktop. That's not a reason to do away with portable music or video playing devices.
It's more of an issue for constantly updated things such as something you are working on, but then I imagine that's far from the main intended use of netbooks (for those who have them as secondary computers, at least).
Currently if I'm out and about, I don't have access to my data at all. A device which lets me access all the data I've put on it, and let's me access the Internet if there's wireless about, is a huge step forward - that there might still be some file that's only at home is a minor point. I don't have to "sync" at all, and it's still a very useful device. Yes, it means that I can't do some coding whilst standing on a street corner or in a pub or cafe, if I'm not synced with my home computer, but that's not really the main reason why I or I imagine others would want one.
The fact that most people only want one computer is probably why laptops outsold desktops - despite the lower power, they prefer the smaller size. Even if they only travel occasionally, that's still an important consideration if they're choosing one or the other.
And here's the thing - chances are that in a few years, we'll see netbooks outselling laptops and desktops for much the same reasons. People wanting only one machine is at least as likely to reduce sales of the desktops and laptops, than it is the netbooks.
(I still don't understand why you seem to want to tinker with "syncing" your computer for hours. I just turn on my computer, and it just works.)
Well if you want to play that card, my Motorola V980 phone was my netbook years earlier.
It's small, cheap, fits in my pocket, makes phone calls, plays music, videos, and games, reads documents, surfs the web, checks multiple email accounts, takes pictures, takes videos, posts pictures without requiring the recipient phone to be able to read email attachments, and can copy and paste.
However, I think it's reasonable to say there's a gap in the market for something that has more power/screen-size/storage than a phone, but is still more portable than a laptop. Not to mention, not having to be tied to a network. I don't think someone who goes on about his Iphone is in a position to make criticisms about "gadget clutter" - the point is, there are clearly different needs and different markets.
I mean - you might as well say "My Iphone is my laptop" or "My Iphone is my desktop computer" if you're going to gloss over significant differences like that.
Another thing I like about netbooks is that they are fully fledged computers - firstly it's useful to have something that's compatible with other computers, but also, the point being is that computers have tended to be far more open than phones; you can run what you like on them, where as phones are far more likely to be locked down, crippled, restricted and so on. On this basis alone, I would hope that netbook style devices come popular, as opposed to just phones.
They have not enough storage for your torrented movie collection
Note that this is true of laptops too really. Indeed, I only bought my laptop a couple of years ago, with an 80GB drive. Plenty of much cheaper netbooks now come with a 160GB drive, so if I bought one, I'd have the odd situation that the netbook would have more capacity. I guess the standard tactic is to get an external drive, but this will change in a few years (and even now, they'll hold a decent amount of video).
The things you list are basically the same with respect to laptops versus desktops, just more so. But even lower powered netbooks probably have more processing power than most people need. The interesting this is that until recently, buying a small laptop was something that you'd expect to pay more for, so I find it great that we've now got small devices that are also much cheaper.
I don't see how "not using it when at home" means it's just a "toy" to show off.
It's like saying who would buy an Ipod - at home, you have your stereo or computer, so the Ipod would be an expensive toy that gets little use, right? But most people don't spend all their time at home.
I've tried lots of netbooks and really was keen on buying one, but then the thought of having to nurse another machine along and to sync apps and data and bookmarks and passwords and updates made me think different...
I don't have a netbook, but I can't be the only one with more than one computer. And why does everything have to be "synced"? I love having Internet access on my phone, it would be stupid for me to ignore this because of an alleged need to "sync". Why bother? I just access whatever web page I want, just as I would with a netbook.
I do currently both have a laptop and a desktop. I didn't want to replace my laptop, but that doesn't mean I'm going to turn down the advantages of a laptop, because lugging my desktop around with me is a bit of a pain.
Indeed. On a related note - and I don't meant to stereotype, but I'm curious to see if the sorts of youths who carry knives and hang out in gangs are the same kind who spend all their time playing video games? I can't quite see it myself. But this is the sort of thing that you could attempt to answer with some research - that is, assuming this Government was interested in performing research before passing laws. Unfortunately, it isn't. Anecdotes such as "One murderer played a violent video game" are considered sufficient, even when they turn out to be false anyway.
It's no different to the recent scaremongering on other things, such as violent horror movies, "extreme" porn and so on. The idea that the violent thugs roaming the streets are computer-game-playing nerds, horror film buffs, who are into kinky BDSM, just doesn't seem convincing to me. (And if nothing else, I find it outright offensive that the Government associates the latter acts with violence and murder.)
Indeed - the problem is that in this country, having a murdered son or daughter apparently gives you the right to pass a law banning whatever you like in your dead child's name. You'll get national media coverage for your campaign, and if the Government agrees, they'll use you as an emotional figurehead, promoting you as the emotive reason why Something Must Be Done.
I saw it with Liz Longhurst and her crusade to criminalise possession of porn she doesn't like, which has now passed. Even now, she continues to pop up in the media again and again giving her uninformed one-sided views, whilst individuals, organisations and academics who opposed the law have had to fight to get even a slim amount of coverage. Anyone who dares criticise her is accused of being disrespectful, whilst it's okay for her to tell those who risk being criminalised "hard luck".
Grieving parents shouldn't be given additional media attention for political campaigning, over anyone else, and they are the last people we should be consulting for an unbiased and unemotional viewpoint on lawmaking.
They should ban pictures of knives. Oh wait, they've done that too - or at least, possession of sexual images of consenting adults role-playing a scene where they "threaten" with a knife is a criminal offence.
Getting back on topic, I suppose we should be glad they're settling on taxation. This Government's usual response for anything it doesn't like is "Ban it".
Similarly, he complains about PNG, saying "JPG is a much more common output" - that's only true because of Windows. PNG is a technically superior format
That's got nothing to do with Windows, nor does it matter which is "technically superior".
The point is that they are both common formats, and both have their advantages. There are some cases where I do want lossy compression - where I'm more concerned about lower file sizes than preserving 100% accuracy. If a program can't support basic file formats, that's a major flaw, no matter how much you try to turn the blame on Windows (yes, obviously it's Windows's fault for making a perfectly decent file format commonly used!)
I believe that Labour have moved economically to the right since being in power (e.g., abolishing University grants and introducing tuition fees). I agree with the rest of what you say, but the kinds of authoritarian moves you describe (which do bother me greatly) aren't related to economics, and I don't see has anything to do with left or right wing.
Hypothetically, one could have extreme left-wing non-authoritarian societies (e.g., anarchism - I think it's a poor idea of a system btw, but nonetheless it's a possible option).
Good point. Just think, if they had passed that law about disconnecting copyright infringers, the Government could've been kicked off the Internet.
Just think of all those starving Wikipedia editors who are now pennyless as a result of this theft, no different to if the Government had gone into their homes and robbed encyclopedias off of their bookshelves. And I hear that piracy has links to organised crime and terrorism!
I said they don't have to follow the rules for monopolies. Of course, they have to follow other rules. Rules about "Baptists but not Catholics, Whites but not Blacks" apply to all businesses, not just monopolies.
You would be first in line if Microsoft prevented you from running OpenOffice, or Apple locked Firefox off of the Mac. Yet for some reason you think Apple gets veto power over applications based on whimsy?!?
I'm just pointing out that Microsoft are a monopoly, and Apple aren't, because the Iphone doesn't have remotely the level of popularity required. Yes, I might moan if Microsoft do something. I might moan if Apple do something - though I'm at least as likely to moan about Motorola or Nokia, and I might as well moan about other niche players in the phone market too.
I fully agree that these practices of Apple are poor, and this is yet another reason to not bother with the Iphone. At least, unlike the OS market, there is thankfully much more choice in the phone market.
You're right that Slashdot has story after story on the Iphone, although none of them AFAICR claim that - instead we get pointless spam/trivia such as "You can now read this webpage on an Iphone" (as if reading a website on a phone was something new or interesting). Even if there was such a story, that doesn't make such an absurd claim true.
Apple are not a monopoly (or even remotely close), so they don't have to play by monopoly rules.
You seem to be arguing that the entire system understands Chinese, but that's a fairly remarkable leap IMO. If the rules themselves are just passive statements, and the man reading the rules doesn't understand the rules being read, then how does the system suddenly obtain understanding once you bring the two together in a black box? Where is this new consciousness located?
Who said anything about consciousness?
Basically it comes down to the meaning of "understanding" - if that's meant to mean in the sense of a conscious entity being aware of it, then sure, an entity can translate or answer questions without understanding them. That is trivially true - anything that a turing machine can do, is something that can be done without anything understanding it.
However, the idea that computers aren't conscious shouldn't be conflated with any other meaning of "understanding". I think it's reasonable to use it in the sense of an intelligent entity having knowledge of something, whether or not that entity is conscious.
One of Searle's replies to this argument is to do away with the rules and the room, and have the man memorise all the rules. Then, the entire system comprises of just the man, who can demonstrate an ability to process Chinese, even though he has no understanding of the language. Is there still a "system" present that understands Chinese?
But in that case, why is it unreasonable to say that the man doesn't understand Chinese? He clearly does. The only reason this is dubious in the original Chinese Room is because the man is helpless without his rulebook, but that doesn't apply here. He understands Chinese, no different to anyone who translates via more usual rules of grammar and vocabulary, he just uses a different method.
Well, he said he didn't want service fees, which wouldn't apply to Pay As You Go. The cost of the phone itself doesn't seem relevant, if it's no more expensive than other portable devices.
Not sure about "cellphone-style activation" - presumably wifi phones can still be used without a phone network(?), but I've not tried it.
What's with the product placement - why not "Say, a Motorola V980"? TFA doesn't even mention Iphone AFAICT. This is Slashdot not some dumbed-down tabloid, you can say "phone" without us having to be given as example of one.
Next we'll be having "Now you can view a webpage... on the Iphone" - but wait, we did have that one last week.
How does Safari do better than say Opera Mobile, or the browsers that have been on various smartphones over the years?
The only ones that suck are those on cheap bog-standard non-smart phones, and even they can run Opera Mini and do it fine. I've known people do real web browsing on higher end phones for years though. It was impressive in, ooh, about 2003.
For years millions of us were waiting for a day when phone makers stopped trying to whittle the web down to phone screen size and instead scaled up the screen and juiced up the browser's power.
Smartphones with large screens have been around for years. I'm not sure what you mean about whittling down? I hope you're not thinking of WAP - when I say browsing of real websites has been around for years, yes I'm talking about accessing full blown websites.
java mobile development is a compatibility nightmare
Well that's an issue for developers, not for the user.
And even with compatibility issues, any Java-supporting phone is still going to be more compatible with a Java application than the Iphone is. I don't buy the argument of "less is better" here - I can always choose not to use a feature if I don't want it, but I'd rather it be my choice.
It's the total package. Hardware, software, integrated together to work seemlessly and intuitively.... they will never have the synergy between the hardware and software.
I just love how you proved my point.
Nowhere am I comparing "spec sheets". I don't care what explanation you give for it being better, but please, give me one based on evidence and facts, not claims of "it's integrated better" that are not backed by evidence or meaningless buzzwords like "synegy". If I wanted that kind of explanation, I'd read the unsolicited Iphone spam that Apple keep sending to my inbox.
Slashdot Mirror
What's brave about this? If I kicked your door in and ran into your living room and screamed motherfucker in your face,
Nice straw man. It's subversive when the act is both illegal, and the law is considered unjust. The act they are doing isn't anti-social, and not comparable to what you claim.
Indeed, they're the ones who risk having their door kicked down (by the police), which is what makes it brave.
I know Opera is amazingly quick
This is probably why it wasn't included :)
The magistrate allowed me to carry on on religious grounds. I carried on pointing out the holes in the case and cleared my name, thankful that I was never asked if I actually believed in any of that god stuff.
Yes, that bit does sound quite bizarre - he let you carry on on religious grounds, but not on the grounds of justice, you know, what the whole point of the court is for...
It can be a pain, but I don't think this is any different to having to have copies of mp3s/videos on your Ipod as well as on your desktop. That's not a reason to do away with portable music or video playing devices.
It's more of an issue for constantly updated things such as something you are working on, but then I imagine that's far from the main intended use of netbooks (for those who have them as secondary computers, at least).
Currently if I'm out and about, I don't have access to my data at all. A device which lets me access all the data I've put on it, and let's me access the Internet if there's wireless about, is a huge step forward - that there might still be some file that's only at home is a minor point. I don't have to "sync" at all, and it's still a very useful device. Yes, it means that I can't do some coding whilst standing on a street corner or in a pub or cafe, if I'm not synced with my home computer, but that's not really the main reason why I or I imagine others would want one.
The fact that most people only want one computer is probably why laptops outsold desktops - despite the lower power, they prefer the smaller size. Even if they only travel occasionally, that's still an important consideration if they're choosing one or the other.
And here's the thing - chances are that in a few years, we'll see netbooks outselling laptops and desktops for much the same reasons. People wanting only one machine is at least as likely to reduce sales of the desktops and laptops, than it is the netbooks.
(I still don't understand why you seem to want to tinker with "syncing" your computer for hours. I just turn on my computer, and it just works.)
Note, the billion dollar phone market showed there was demand for increasingly powerful pocket-sized devices long before the Iphone.
Well if you want to play that card, my Motorola V980 phone was my netbook years earlier.
It's small, cheap, fits in my pocket, makes phone calls, plays music, videos, and games, reads documents, surfs the web, checks multiple email accounts, takes pictures, takes videos, posts pictures without requiring the recipient phone to be able to read email attachments, and can copy and paste.
However, I think it's reasonable to say there's a gap in the market for something that has more power/screen-size/storage than a phone, but is still more portable than a laptop. Not to mention, not having to be tied to a network. I don't think someone who goes on about his Iphone is in a position to make criticisms about "gadget clutter" - the point is, there are clearly different needs and different markets.
I mean - you might as well say "My Iphone is my laptop" or "My Iphone is my desktop computer" if you're going to gloss over significant differences like that.
Another thing I like about netbooks is that they are fully fledged computers - firstly it's useful to have something that's compatible with other computers, but also, the point being is that computers have tended to be far more open than phones; you can run what you like on them, where as phones are far more likely to be locked down, crippled, restricted and so on. On this basis alone, I would hope that netbook style devices come popular, as opposed to just phones.
They have not enough storage for your torrented movie collection
Note that this is true of laptops too really. Indeed, I only bought my laptop a couple of years ago, with an 80GB drive. Plenty of much cheaper netbooks now come with a 160GB drive, so if I bought one, I'd have the odd situation that the netbook would have more capacity. I guess the standard tactic is to get an external drive, but this will change in a few years (and even now, they'll hold a decent amount of video).
The things you list are basically the same with respect to laptops versus desktops, just more so. But even lower powered netbooks probably have more processing power than most people need. The interesting this is that until recently, buying a small laptop was something that you'd expect to pay more for, so I find it great that we've now got small devices that are also much cheaper.
I'm sure I've seen people using smartphones or handhelds with styluses for years.
But no doubt, if Apple do it, it'll be praised as another mythical "first".
I don't see how "not using it when at home" means it's just a "toy" to show off.
It's like saying who would buy an Ipod - at home, you have your stereo or computer, so the Ipod would be an expensive toy that gets little use, right? But most people don't spend all their time at home.
I've tried lots of netbooks and really was keen on buying one, but then the thought of having to nurse another machine along and to sync apps and data and bookmarks and passwords and updates made me think different...
I don't have a netbook, but I can't be the only one with more than one computer. And why does everything have to be "synced"? I love having Internet access on my phone, it would be stupid for me to ignore this because of an alleged need to "sync". Why bother? I just access whatever web page I want, just as I would with a netbook.
I do currently both have a laptop and a desktop. I didn't want to replace my laptop, but that doesn't mean I'm going to turn down the advantages of a laptop, because lugging my desktop around with me is a bit of a pain.
Indeed. On a related note - and I don't meant to stereotype, but I'm curious to see if the sorts of youths who carry knives and hang out in gangs are the same kind who spend all their time playing video games? I can't quite see it myself. But this is the sort of thing that you could attempt to answer with some research - that is, assuming this Government was interested in performing research before passing laws. Unfortunately, it isn't. Anecdotes such as "One murderer played a violent video game" are considered sufficient, even when they turn out to be false anyway.
It's no different to the recent scaremongering on other things, such as violent horror movies, "extreme" porn and so on. The idea that the violent thugs roaming the streets are computer-game-playing nerds, horror film buffs, who are into kinky BDSM, just doesn't seem convincing to me. (And if nothing else, I find it outright offensive that the Government associates the latter acts with violence and murder.)
Indeed - the problem is that in this country, having a murdered son or daughter apparently gives you the right to pass a law banning whatever you like in your dead child's name. You'll get national media coverage for your campaign, and if the Government agrees, they'll use you as an emotional figurehead, promoting you as the emotive reason why Something Must Be Done.
I saw it with Liz Longhurst and her crusade to criminalise possession of porn she doesn't like, which has now passed. Even now, she continues to pop up in the media again and again giving her uninformed one-sided views, whilst individuals, organisations and academics who opposed the law have had to fight to get even a slim amount of coverage. Anyone who dares criticise her is accused of being disrespectful, whilst it's okay for her to tell those who risk being criminalised "hard luck".
Grieving parents shouldn't be given additional media attention for political campaigning, over anyone else, and they are the last people we should be consulting for an unbiased and unemotional viewpoint on lawmaking.
They should ban pictures of knives. Oh wait, they've done that too - or at least, possession of sexual images of consenting adults role-playing a scene where they "threaten" with a knife is a criminal offence.
Getting back on topic, I suppose we should be glad they're settling on taxation. This Government's usual response for anything it doesn't like is "Ban it".
Similarly, he complains about PNG, saying "JPG is a much more common output" - that's only true because of Windows. PNG is a technically superior format
That's got nothing to do with Windows, nor does it matter which is "technically superior".
The point is that they are both common formats, and both have their advantages. There are some cases where I do want lossy compression - where I'm more concerned about lower file sizes than preserving 100% accuracy. If a program can't support basic file formats, that's a major flaw, no matter how much you try to turn the blame on Windows (yes, obviously it's Windows's fault for making a perfectly decent file format commonly used!)
I believe that Labour have moved economically to the right since being in power (e.g., abolishing University grants and introducing tuition fees). I agree with the rest of what you say, but the kinds of authoritarian moves you describe (which do bother me greatly) aren't related to economics, and I don't see has anything to do with left or right wing.
But you've swapped "left wing" with "socialism".
Hypothetically, one could have extreme left-wing non-authoritarian societies (e.g., anarchism - I think it's a poor idea of a system btw, but nonetheless it's a possible option).
Good point. Just think, if they had passed that law about disconnecting copyright infringers, the Government could've been kicked off the Internet.
Just think of all those starving Wikipedia editors who are now pennyless as a result of this theft, no different to if the Government had gone into their homes and robbed encyclopedias off of their bookshelves. And I hear that piracy has links to organised crime and terrorism!
I said they don't have to follow the rules for monopolies. Of course, they have to follow other rules. Rules about "Baptists but not Catholics, Whites but not Blacks" apply to all businesses, not just monopolies.
You would be first in line if Microsoft prevented you from running OpenOffice, or Apple locked Firefox off of the Mac. Yet for some reason you think Apple gets veto power over applications based on whimsy?!?
I would? Really, I'm no Apple fan :)
I'm just pointing out that Microsoft are a monopoly, and Apple aren't, because the Iphone doesn't have remotely the level of popularity required. Yes, I might moan if Microsoft do something. I might moan if Apple do something - though I'm at least as likely to moan about Motorola or Nokia, and I might as well moan about other niche players in the phone market too.
I fully agree that these practices of Apple are poor, and this is yet another reason to not bother with the Iphone. At least, unlike the OS market, there is thankfully much more choice in the phone market.
You're right that Slashdot has story after story on the Iphone, although none of them AFAICR claim that - instead we get pointless spam/trivia such as "You can now read this webpage on an Iphone" (as if reading a website on a phone was something new or interesting). Even if there was such a story, that doesn't make such an absurd claim true.
Apple are not a monopoly (or even remotely close), so they don't have to play by monopoly rules.
You seem to be arguing that the entire system understands Chinese, but that's a fairly remarkable leap IMO. If the rules themselves are just passive statements, and the man reading the rules doesn't understand the rules being read, then how does the system suddenly obtain understanding once you bring the two together in a black box? Where is this new consciousness located?
Who said anything about consciousness?
Basically it comes down to the meaning of "understanding" - if that's meant to mean in the sense of a conscious entity being aware of it, then sure, an entity can translate or answer questions without understanding them. That is trivially true - anything that a turing machine can do, is something that can be done without anything understanding it.
However, the idea that computers aren't conscious shouldn't be conflated with any other meaning of "understanding". I think it's reasonable to use it in the sense of an intelligent entity having knowledge of something, whether or not that entity is conscious.
One of Searle's replies to this argument is to do away with the rules and the room, and have the man memorise all the rules. Then, the entire system comprises of just the man, who can demonstrate an ability to process Chinese, even though he has no understanding of the language. Is there still a "system" present that understands Chinese?
But in that case, why is it unreasonable to say that the man doesn't understand Chinese? He clearly does. The only reason this is dubious in the original Chinese Room is because the man is helpless without his rulebook, but that doesn't apply here. He understands Chinese, no different to anyone who translates via more usual rules of grammar and vocabulary, he just uses a different method.
Well, he said he didn't want service fees, which wouldn't apply to Pay As You Go. The cost of the phone itself doesn't seem relevant, if it's no more expensive than other portable devices.
Not sure about "cellphone-style activation" - presumably wifi phones can still be used without a phone network(?), but I've not tried it.
What's with the product placement - why not "Say, a Motorola V980"? TFA doesn't even mention Iphone AFAICT. This is Slashdot not some dumbed-down tabloid, you can say "phone" without us having to be given as example of one.
Next we'll be having "Now you can view a webpage ... on the Iphone" - but wait, we did have that one last week.
How does Safari do better than say Opera Mobile, or the browsers that have been on various smartphones over the years?
The only ones that suck are those on cheap bog-standard non-smart phones, and even they can run Opera Mini and do it fine. I've known people do real web browsing on higher end phones for years though. It was impressive in, ooh, about 2003.
For years millions of us were waiting for a day when phone makers stopped trying to whittle the web down to phone screen size and instead scaled up the screen and juiced up the browser's power.
Smartphones with large screens have been around for years. I'm not sure what you mean about whittling down? I hope you're not thinking of WAP - when I say browsing of real websites has been around for years, yes I'm talking about accessing full blown websites.
java mobile development is a compatibility nightmare
Well that's an issue for developers, not for the user.
And even with compatibility issues, any Java-supporting phone is still going to be more compatible with a Java application than the Iphone is. I don't buy the argument of "less is better" here - I can always choose not to use a feature if I don't want it, but I'd rather it be my choice.
It's the total package. Hardware, software, integrated together to work seemlessly and intuitively. ... they will never have the synergy between the hardware and software.
I just love how you proved my point.
Nowhere am I comparing "spec sheets". I don't care what explanation you give for it being better, but please, give me one based on evidence and facts, not claims of "it's integrated better" that are not backed by evidence or meaningless buzzwords like "synegy". If I wanted that kind of explanation, I'd read the unsolicited Iphone spam that Apple keep sending to my inbox.