Discover had an article about this phenomenon quite some time ago, almost certainly well before that movie was released. Not a new idea even among scientists.
And yes Microsoft really does intentionally break compatability between releases, and especially with their competitors.
Any evidence for that claim?
There's plenty of software that doesn't run in later versions of Windows.
Name some. I've only hit one program for a post-3.11 Windows version, either 9x or NT line, that won't run under XP. Hell, most DOS programs still run.
Think Windows 3.11 software
That's over a decade old. Even if they are breaking compatibility with it, I really don't think you can fault them for it.
Windows 98 software and even Windows NT software
Like I said, name some, because I've only ever run across one. (Hasbro's Clue. And a pretty poorly programmed piece of software too. Didn't even run quite right for me in its intended version of Windows.)
This is possible because while Microsoft is intentionaly breaking compatability between releases, wine is being developed to run programs from any Windows version
What's this?
I can think of very few systems that have been around as long as DOS/Windows and have better backwards compatibility. I can think of only one Windows program that runs on an earlier version but not XP. About the ONLY thing that MS has done to break compatibility is prevent direct hardware access (e.g. for sound cards) in old DOS programs.
Only system I know that's better (though I'm sure there are plenty more, but still a minority) about keeping backwards compatibility is IBM mainframes. What may be the best common mainframes in the world (IBM z/Series) still runs stuff made to run on the s/390 architecture.
Re:Here's what we could use for the patent section
on
Pictures by Hive Mind
·
· Score: 1
Here's another that would be useful and would be useful.
The real questions are: is there a hack that requires so little effort from the part of the user that it is worth the trouble, and if so, how long until it is discovered ?
There probably is, but if the state of the original Xbox is any indication, it'll be a Long Time (TM) before it's found. To the best of my knowledge there is still no crack for the Xbox that doesn't involve hardware modification. Once you get into hardware probably very few people will attempt it. Too risky.
That's an attitude I always find refreshing. Let's not worry about making small improvements and only go for the big ones. After all, slow and steady loses the race. There's no point in making things better if we're not making them a LOT better.
I agree that there's not proof that we're behind warming.
However, that seems to be the wrong attitude to take. The safer mindset is to proceed as if we ARE responsible until it's proven otherwise. That way we make strides towards fixing the problem if there is one. And if there's not, then we're perhaps a bit poorer but really no worse for the wear overall. (And that neglects any secondardy benefits brought about by the environmental push.)
Because if we keep on proceeding as if we AREN'T responsible until it's shown we ARE (which is what at least a lot of the world seems to be doing, some out of choice (USA) some out of economic near necessity), by the time we figure that out we could be in over our heads.
It's the same reason when you delete a file and your OS asks you if you're sure it's the "no" button that's default instead of "yes"; even if the latter is more likely, blindly choosing it is dangerous. (The same reason is behind the explosion of the Challenger too.)
Instead of sitting next to the phone with the speakerphone on or (even worse) with the headset up to your ear you can wander around the house. It's only a problem if you would otherwise completely leave the house. When on hold you're pretty much stuck in one room. (Unless you've got a cordless phone, but unless you've got one with a mobile speaker phone (which I've never seen on a non cell) you have to go back to the using the headset thing.) But you can usually hear the phone ring anywhere.
Besides, what's wrong with them giving you a time they anticipate calling you back? Or even giving you the option and setting up essentially a phone appointment. If it's not gonna be for a couple hours you can go out for a bit.
Be conservative in your estimates of when you can call back. Then in the common case when you could call back earlier, either call back sooner in case they're around (but if not, still call back again when you are supposed to) or start taking live calls.
Yeah... and it may get worse. Here's the story to the best of my knowledge:
Einstein did some calculations and stuff and came up with two potential models of the universe. (Perhaps two solutions to his equations?) One had the universe expanding, the other contracting. Einstein called up some astronomers and asked which it was. They told him to get lost, that the universe was static. So Einstein went back and added the cosmological constant so that it matched "reality." Later Hubble was like "look, y'all, the universe is expanding," and Einstein was like "my bad" and dropped the constant.
But here's the thing: the universe's expansion is accelerating. If it models something like the cosmological constant, that means that the extra force Einstein added must be repellant. This tells me that the model he picked to add the constant to was the contracting one. Which means that I don't see a correspondance to reality.
There might be something deep about why about the same force would take the contracting universe model and make it static would also take the expanding universe model and make it accelerating, but I don't see what it is.
Which means that if they turn out close, I think it's much more likely that it's just a really lucky coincidence rather than the genious of Einstein. Even if there is a deep correspondence, the fact that Einstein added it to an incorrect model to bring it to another incorrect model, and when that incorrect model was found to be incorrect renounced it, pretty much rules out the possibility that this is really an example of his genious.
This is, at least, the reaction I have whenever I read about the cosmological constant... am I totally off-base?
How would you protect the company's IP but allow an independent and honest study of the code to take place?
Have them release the source to the public. Not LICENCE the source to the public, just release it.
Sure, it makes it eaiser for other companies to copy what they're doing, but it is no less legal simply because it's easier. And if we apply the same standards to everyone, any company wanting to get into the elections business would need to release code, so it would be at least sorta easy to detect copying.
I'd replace your suggestion with one closer to the 'opt-in' end of the spectrum:
The first time you want to make such a call to a number, Google doesn't immediately call you; instead, you must call first. Google gives you an 800 number and a PIN. User calls Google and enters the PIN. If the caller ID gives the same number as what was entered, it puts the call through to the most recently requested company, and from then on will call like as before.
Not by my reading of the bill. The three offenses' definitions all begin:
If a person is not the owner or operator of the computer, the person may not knowingly cause computer software to be copied to a computer in this state and use the software to
Your estimates are not at all conservative, especially 1 infected PC per CD.
I have two hunches that would put the number well below that: 1) Most people aren't going to play it on their computer, and 2) There are going to be more instances of one computer having multiple CDs played on it than instances of one CD infecting multiple computers. In the case of multiple CDs on one computer, almost certainly that would only count as one violation.
I'd put the number probably at 1/10 of an infected PC per CD.
Though that's still by your latter estimate almost $300M, which is still a nice chunk of change.
The only problem is convincing the students that their teacher really is a human and can answer questions just like a classmate (and hopefully, better than the classmate).
And I think that the chatroom could help with this. Students could see that others have the same questions as them, thus sorta embolden them to ask it in class. I think a lot of the time people don't ask questions because they think they might be alone in not knowing it and don't want their classmates to think they don't know.
Though who knows if that's the real reason, or if a chatroom would help relieve anxiety. (I think the anonymous nature would help.)
So I think a chatroom could help and wouldn't hurt.
(Also, you have to take into account that not all teachers are good. In fact, there are plenty of sucky ones. I have one now that really doesn't answer questions well.
Likewise, any good college-level teacher wants to spend no time doing babysitting of this sort
Get the TA to do it.:-p
I really wouldn't mind a quick perusal. And it could also help to identify sticky areas.
There's only so much enjoyment you can get out of doodling.
Tell that to an art major.
Really, what possible use could the Internet have when you are supposed to be paying attention to the Prof?
Let's see. You could look up additional information on what's being covered. You can work on homework. Or if you already know most of the material in a class, you can go and surf around instead of skipping entirely.
It was just a couple weeks ago we were covering the towers of hanoi in a class I'm TAing (actually TI, I=intern) and I went searching for an animation online. Found it, and thus added something to the lecture. This is perhaps more of an effect than normal since I'm the TI, but students can look for stuff for their own good.
You don't need to be checking email, surfing websites, or posting to your blog. You need to be paying attention and taking notes.
I say keep the laptops, take away the Net
I can say the same thing about laptops. You don't need to be playing video games, programming, or otherwise fooling around. You need to be paying attention and taking notes. Why draw the line between the laptop and internet and not before the laptop? People did just fine with just a notebook (and I DON'T mean a computer) and pencil.
PSU uses roaming profiles, and while I can't speak to what they've done to get it to where it is or the portion of network load brought about by them, login times really aren't bad at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Discover had an article about this phenomenon quite some time ago, almost certainly well before that movie was released. Not a new idea even among scientists.
And yes Microsoft really does intentionally break compatability between releases, and especially with their competitors.
Any evidence for that claim?
There's plenty of software that doesn't run in later versions of Windows.
Name some. I've only hit one program for a post-3.11 Windows version, either 9x or NT line, that won't run under XP. Hell, most DOS programs still run.
Think Windows 3.11 software
That's over a decade old. Even if they are breaking compatibility with it, I really don't think you can fault them for it.
Windows 98 software and even Windows NT software
Like I said, name some, because I've only ever run across one. (Hasbro's Clue. And a pretty poorly programmed piece of software too. Didn't even run quite right for me in its intended version of Windows.)
I can think of only one Windows program that runs on an earlier version but not XP
s/one Windows program/one Windows program that I've tried
This is possible because while Microsoft is intentionaly breaking compatability between releases, wine is being developed to run programs from any Windows version
What's this?
I can think of very few systems that have been around as long as DOS/Windows and have better backwards compatibility. I can think of only one Windows program that runs on an earlier version but not XP. About the ONLY thing that MS has done to break compatibility is prevent direct hardware access (e.g. for sound cards) in old DOS programs.
Only system I know that's better (though I'm sure there are plenty more, but still a minority) about keeping backwards compatibility is IBM mainframes. What may be the best common mainframes in the world (IBM z/Series) still runs stuff made to run on the s/390 architecture.
Here's another that would be useful and would be useful.
*inserts foot into mouth*
Sorry 'bout that
if they sell millions of xboxs then the prices of components will fall.
But so will the price of the Xbox. Especially in probably about 3-4 months when the PS3 is released.
The real questions are: is there a hack that requires so little effort from the part of the user that it is worth the trouble, and if so, how long until it is discovered ?
There probably is, but if the state of the original Xbox is any indication, it'll be a Long Time (TM) before it's found. To the best of my knowledge there is still no crack for the Xbox that doesn't involve hardware modification. Once you get into hardware probably very few people will attempt it. Too risky.
Why?
Why climb Mount Everest?
Because it's there!
The Xbox 360 is there, and thus these people won't rest until it runs Linux.
That's an attitude I always find refreshing. Let's not worry about making small improvements and only go for the big ones. After all, slow and steady loses the race. There's no point in making things better if we're not making them a LOT better.
I agree that there's not proof that we're behind warming.
However, that seems to be the wrong attitude to take. The safer mindset is to proceed as if we ARE responsible until it's proven otherwise. That way we make strides towards fixing the problem if there is one. And if there's not, then we're perhaps a bit poorer but really no worse for the wear overall. (And that neglects any secondardy benefits brought about by the environmental push.)
Because if we keep on proceeding as if we AREN'T responsible until it's shown we ARE (which is what at least a lot of the world seems to be doing, some out of choice (USA) some out of economic near necessity), by the time we figure that out we could be in over our heads.
It's the same reason when you delete a file and your OS asks you if you're sure it's the "no" button that's default instead of "yes"; even if the latter is more likely, blindly choosing it is dangerous. (The same reason is behind the explosion of the Challenger too.)
The propane dryer is a lot faster than an electric dryer...
Does it run hotter, or just somehow dries more efficiently at the same temperature?
Why wouldn't it help?
Instead of sitting next to the phone with the speakerphone on or (even worse) with the headset up to your ear you can wander around the house. It's only a problem if you would otherwise completely leave the house. When on hold you're pretty much stuck in one room. (Unless you've got a cordless phone, but unless you've got one with a mobile speaker phone (which I've never seen on a non cell) you have to go back to the using the headset thing.) But you can usually hear the phone ring anywhere.
Besides, what's wrong with them giving you a time they anticipate calling you back? Or even giving you the option and setting up essentially a phone appointment. If it's not gonna be for a couple hours you can go out for a bit.
Be conservative in your estimates of when you can call back. Then in the common case when you could call back earlier, either call back sooner in case they're around (but if not, still call back again when you are supposed to) or start taking live calls.
Yeah... and it may get worse. Here's the story to the best of my knowledge:
Einstein did some calculations and stuff and came up with two potential models of the universe. (Perhaps two solutions to his equations?) One had the universe expanding, the other contracting. Einstein called up some astronomers and asked which it was. They told him to get lost, that the universe was static. So Einstein went back and added the cosmological constant so that it matched "reality." Later Hubble was like "look, y'all, the universe is expanding," and Einstein was like "my bad" and dropped the constant.
But here's the thing: the universe's expansion is accelerating. If it models something like the cosmological constant, that means that the extra force Einstein added must be repellant. This tells me that the model he picked to add the constant to was the contracting one. Which means that I don't see a correspondance to reality.
There might be something deep about why about the same force would take the contracting universe model and make it static would also take the expanding universe model and make it accelerating, but I don't see what it is.
Which means that if they turn out close, I think it's much more likely that it's just a really lucky coincidence rather than the genious of Einstein. Even if there is a deep correspondence, the fact that Einstein added it to an incorrect model to bring it to another incorrect model, and when that incorrect model was found to be incorrect renounced it, pretty much rules out the possibility that this is really an example of his genious.
This is, at least, the reaction I have whenever I read about the cosmological constant... am I totally off-base?
How would you protect the company's IP but allow an independent and honest study of the code to take place?
Have them release the source to the public. Not LICENCE the source to the public, just release it.
Sure, it makes it eaiser for other companies to copy what they're doing, but it is no less legal simply because it's easier. And if we apply the same standards to everyone, any company wanting to get into the elections business would need to release code, so it would be at least sorta easy to detect copying.
I'd replace your suggestion with one closer to the 'opt-in' end of the spectrum:
The first time you want to make such a call to a number, Google doesn't immediately call you; instead, you must call first. Google gives you an 800 number and a PIN. User calls Google and enters the PIN. If the caller ID gives the same number as what was entered, it puts the call through to the most recently requested company, and from then on will call like as before.
So no one victim will be repeatedly crank-called.
From the same number.
Your estimates are not at all conservative, especially 1 infected PC per CD.
I have two hunches that would put the number well below that:
1) Most people aren't going to play it on their computer, and
2) There are going to be more instances of one computer having multiple CDs played on it than instances of one CD infecting multiple computers. In the case of multiple CDs on one computer, almost certainly that would only count as one violation.
I'd put the number probably at 1/10 of an infected PC per CD.
Though that's still by your latter estimate almost $300M, which is still a nice chunk of change.
The only problem is convincing the students that their teacher really is a human and can answer questions just like a classmate (and hopefully, better than the classmate).
:-p
And I think that the chatroom could help with this. Students could see that others have the same questions as them, thus sorta embolden them to ask it in class. I think a lot of the time people don't ask questions because they think they might be alone in not knowing it and don't want their classmates to think they don't know.
Though who knows if that's the real reason, or if a chatroom would help relieve anxiety. (I think the anonymous nature would help.)
So I think a chatroom could help and wouldn't hurt.
(Also, you have to take into account that not all teachers are good. In fact, there are plenty of sucky ones. I have one now that really doesn't answer questions well.
Likewise, any good college-level teacher wants to spend no time doing babysitting of this sort
Get the TA to do it.
I really wouldn't mind a quick perusal. And it could also help to identify sticky areas.
There's only so much enjoyment you can get out of doodling.
Tell that to an art major.
Really, what possible use could the Internet have when you are supposed to be paying attention to the Prof?
Let's see. You could look up additional information on what's being covered. You can work on homework. Or if you already know most of the material in a class, you can go and surf around instead of skipping entirely.
It was just a couple weeks ago we were covering the towers of hanoi in a class I'm TAing (actually TI, I=intern) and I went searching for an animation online. Found it, and thus added something to the lecture. This is perhaps more of an effect than normal since I'm the TI, but students can look for stuff for their own good.
You don't need to be checking email, surfing websites, or posting to your blog. You need to be paying attention and taking notes.
I say keep the laptops, take away the Net
I can say the same thing about laptops. You don't need to be playing video games, programming, or otherwise fooling around. You need to be paying attention and taking notes. Why draw the line between the laptop and internet and not before the laptop? People did just fine with just a notebook (and I DON'T mean a computer) and pencil.
The word "between" implies that he can't be both at the same time.
PSU uses roaming profiles, and while I can't speak to what they've done to get it to where it is or the portion of network load brought about by them, login times really aren't bad at all.
Does anyone send a resume in .doc format?
I *must* submit one to one place in DOC.
Had to completely recreate it too...