>>I would think it would cannibalize their traditional digital printing service (and the $500 camera sales that go with it).
I doubt it. Probably a lot of people would still find it cheaper to just buy a $200 camera once than continue renting the reusable ones. The people buying $500 cameras probably wouldn't be satisfied with the resuable cameras being "rented" anyway, so wouldn't lose their business.
But it could go either way... It'd be an interesting experiment anyway.
To be fair, though a cell phone thing is a bit out there, it'd probably be possible to come up with a routing method for elevators that, based on a known destination floor before they get to your current location, could act more efficiently.
Bingo. Cater the classes to locals, and perhaps get some 'specialty' equipment (like the aforemontioned card readers) that tourists could use. The biggie of course is a (preferably broadband) internet connection so people can check email, keep up on news,/., etc. while they are away. Other than that I can't really think of anything.
>>I don't want anyone peeking in my windows (ports) without my permission.
I take it that you would support the companies that publish pages and stuff on open, publically available HTTP and FTP servers that they don't want people to find (quarterly reports that haven't been officially released yet, sale prices for the upcoming sale, etc.) and then sue people who happen to guess the url right?
However, there is an enormous difference between a lifesaver such as the book you mention* and downloading music for nothing but entertainment value. And P2P music sharing is NOT fair use, no matter what you want to think.
*Legally, this is questionable. There is precedent for medical articles to be photocopied and distributed, though this is still a far cry from a verbatim copy of a book created for mass resale. I would tend to say that, legally, this would not be covered by fair use.
Morally, the reproduction may or may not be justified in my opinion, depending on the nature of the original book. If it was long and complex, then verbatim copies would probably be acceptable morally provided you adhered to any legal judgements made. If the work is simple however, it would probably be possible to publish a description of the method without any hint of copyright infringement. If this was the case, I would say that you should create such a work and sell that instead.
>>Or how about if a prominent politician or business leader said all kinds of racist / sexist / etc. things in a private place protecting them by copyright.
Conversations and perhaps even speeches are, I believe, not copyrightable. In any instance, you could quote portions of either of the examples you present under the fair use provisions.
To be honest, I've downloaded almost 70 year old recordings. Specifically of Pablo Casals (often called the best cellist of the 20th century) playing the Bach cello suites, recorded 1934-1936.
It's hard to say exactly what the improvement is, but I have noticed a substantial rise in life when turning the contrast down. I've never done any experiments with it really, but I live about 3 hr from Pittsburgh and make the trip fairly regularily, and the batteries will last for under the duration of the trip (typically a little more than 2 hours) when using audio CDs. Turning the contrast down gives life to spare, typically finishing with 1/4 bars left in the battery indicator. (A rough estimate, I know...)
The other thing I've noticed is using MP3 CDs also helps, as at least the RioVolt I have (I have the SP250 model) will stop spinning the CD for as much as 1/4 of the time. The 8 hr life was almost exclusively using MP3 CDs.
The NiMH batteries that came with my RioVolt MP3/CD player ran it for 8 hours without a charge a couple days ago and still had a good amout of juice left.
(Disclaimer: the contrast of the display was turned way down so as to not waste power; turing it down from default settings to barely readable can double the like in my experience.)
I was also in a computer lab as a continuing ed class was being given with a bunch of old people. One of them, after opening Word, says "How do I get rid of this damn paperclip."
My dad has a 10+ year old LaserJet 4 that he replaced with a LJ 1200 for most uses only a couple months ago because it began to jam. He much prefers the old one for short documents that won't jam.
I like this idea. I am also in support of the repeal of lemon laws. Consumers can pick cars that are safe, and if they want to get one that isn't, that's their choice. Related, all other laws that aim to protect the consumer from corporations are needless and should be repealed.
>>a) Bullshit. The average laptop is only worth about $250 in parts bought in bulk. Tablets are only slightly more expensive due to the touchscreen. But the form factor reduces the cost.
You can barely even get an LCD monitor for $250 retail (lowest LCD price on pricewatch is $196 for a 14"), let alone the motherboard, processor, hard drive, battery, CD/DVD drive, keyboard, trackpad, case, power adaptor, and RAM. I know things are a lot cheaper in bulk, but I don't see them becoming cheap enough to justify your $250.
>>b) Companies exisiting for profit is the worst approach. They should exist for the customer. We should be their masters, not the other way around.
Then move into a commune.
>>c) Because people have no choice but to pay more than $400. If a company got wise and decided to make a laptop for $300, they'd make a killing because everybody and his brother would buy one. Even if the quality wasn't as high. Smart people are more concerned with cost than anything else. The sheep who pay too much for a status symbol are just idiots. Sounds like you just might be an idiot.
IF such a company would make a killing, I'm sure that you could start it. We'll see how you do. You sell $250 worth of stuff at $300 and we'll see if you sell enough to make it worth your time and the risk.
I have a sneaking suspicion that people won't go out and buy a $100 upgrade so they can get a new web browser, no matter how slick it is. I doubt it would even be a deciding factor.
Yeah, most of the ones I've seen are 12x12 (and every time I see one I think "why 12?" but whatever).
And while on a fairly good day I can multiply 19 by 21 in my head quickly (my arithmatic skills vary) and even on a crummy day can telly you almost instantly what 47^2* is, I would tend to say that virtually everyone *calculates*, rather than *knows* the answer. Whereas if I say what is 8 times 12, you probably spit out 96 without calculation. Most people here probably know all products of [1-12] times [1-12] witchout really thinking... and hence I would say know their times tables, as generally I think that is what is meant by that phrase.
*There's a neat trick for squaring numbers near 50 I picked up from one of the Feynman books when he told how he learned it from someone elso, maybe Hans Bethe, but I'm not sure. Here it is, with 47 as the example: 47^2 = (50-3)^2 = 50^2 - 2*50*3 + 3^2 = 2500 - 100*3 + 3^2 = 2209 So in a nutshell, take the difference from 50, add or subtract that many hundreds from 2500, then add the square of the number.
This of course works with numbers other than 50, but it's a lot easier to do 2500-3*100 than it is, say 6400-3*160 for 77^2.
Slashdot Mirror
"that money we were saving for a TiVo is up for grabs."
I'll take it
>>A camera on a steady rail should have been able to do it, and without the jarring you can see where it moves between cameras.
The G-forces would have torn the film apart.
>>I would think it would cannibalize their traditional digital printing service (and the $500 camera sales that go with it).
I doubt it. Probably a lot of people would still find it cheaper to just buy a $200 camera once than continue renting the reusable ones. The people buying $500 cameras probably wouldn't be satisfied with the resuable cameras being "rented" anyway, so wouldn't lose their business.
But it could go either way... It'd be an interesting experiment anyway.
To be fair, though a cell phone thing is a bit out there, it'd probably be possible to come up with a routing method for elevators that, based on a known destination floor before they get to your current location, could act more efficiently.
Bingo. Cater the classes to locals, and perhaps get some 'specialty' equipment (like the aforemontioned card readers) that tourists could use. The biggie of course is a (preferably broadband) internet connection so people can check email, keep up on news, /., etc. while they are away. Other than that I can't really think of anything.
Has this ever been upheld? I cannot see any reasonable court siding with them.
>>I don't want anyone peeking in my windows (ports) without my permission.
I take it that you would support the companies that publish pages and stuff on open, publically available HTTP and FTP servers that they don't want people to find (quarterly reports that haven't been officially released yet, sale prices for the upcoming sale, etc.) and then sue people who happen to guess the url right?
However, there is an enormous difference between a lifesaver such as the book you mention* and downloading music for nothing but entertainment value. And P2P music sharing is NOT fair use, no matter what you want to think.
*Legally, this is questionable. There is precedent for medical articles to be photocopied and distributed, though this is still a far cry from a verbatim copy of a book created for mass resale. I would tend to say that, legally, this would not be covered by fair use.
Morally, the reproduction may or may not be justified in my opinion, depending on the nature of the original book. If it was long and complex, then verbatim copies would probably be acceptable morally provided you adhered to any legal judgements made. If the work is simple however, it would probably be possible to publish a description of the method without any hint of copyright infringement. If this was the case, I would say that you should create such a work and sell that instead.
>>Or how about if a prominent politician or business leader said all kinds of racist / sexist / etc. things in a private place protecting them by copyright.
Conversations and perhaps even speeches are, I believe, not copyrightable. In any instance, you could quote portions of either of the examples you present under the fair use provisions.
To be honest, I've downloaded almost 70 year old recordings. Specifically of Pablo Casals (often called the best cellist of the 20th century) playing the Bach cello suites, recorded 1934-1936.
It's hard to say exactly what the improvement is, but I have noticed a substantial rise in life when turning the contrast down. I've never done any experiments with it really, but I live about 3 hr from Pittsburgh and make the trip fairly regularily, and the batteries will last for under the duration of the trip (typically a little more than 2 hours) when using audio CDs. Turning the contrast down gives life to spare, typically finishing with 1/4 bars left in the battery indicator. (A rough estimate, I know...)
The other thing I've noticed is using MP3 CDs also helps, as at least the RioVolt I have (I have the SP250 model) will stop spinning the CD for as much as 1/4 of the time. The 8 hr life was almost exclusively using MP3 CDs.
The NiMH batteries that came with my RioVolt MP3/CD player ran it for 8 hours without a charge a couple days ago and still had a good amout of juice left.
(Disclaimer: the contrast of the display was turned way down so as to not waste power; turing it down from default settings to barely readable can double the like in my experience.)
I was also in a computer lab as a continuing ed class was being given with a bunch of old people. One of them, after opening Word, says "How do I get rid of this damn paperclip."
To be fair, with water cooling you could probably completely seal off the inside of the case in terms of airflow and not have much dust.
I still wouldn't want to do it though... I, like the great grandparent, am very wary of having water cursing through my computer.
This is the best idea I have yet heard about dealing with spam...
With the correction you noted, this is correct.
Thank you very much... I will pass this information on.
*opens Evolution for mail*
Sarcasm kind of goes missing in print...
I can verify this... I just bought one (black) about 5 days ago. It was $20 as opposed to the original $30.
My dad has a 10+ year old LaserJet 4 that he replaced with a LJ 1200 for most uses only a couple months ago because it began to jam. He much prefers the old one for short documents that won't jam.
I like this idea. I am also in support of the repeal of lemon laws. Consumers can pick cars that are safe, and if they want to get one that isn't, that's their choice. Related, all other laws that aim to protect the consumer from corporations are needless and should be repealed.
Gosh, you better go avail yourself to all the focus groups... "the one man focus group" you could call yourself.
That's a bit harsh above, but there are people who'd manage quite nicely with a tablet PC.
>>a) Bullshit. The average laptop is only worth about $250 in parts bought in bulk. Tablets are only slightly more expensive due to the touchscreen. But the form factor reduces the cost.
You can barely even get an LCD monitor for $250 retail (lowest LCD price on pricewatch is $196 for a 14"), let alone the motherboard, processor, hard drive, battery, CD/DVD drive, keyboard, trackpad, case, power adaptor, and RAM. I know things are a lot cheaper in bulk, but I don't see them becoming cheap enough to justify your $250.
>>b) Companies exisiting for profit is the worst approach. They should exist for the customer. We should be their masters, not the other way around.
Then move into a commune.
>>c) Because people have no choice but to pay more than $400. If a company got wise and decided to make a laptop for $300, they'd make a killing because everybody and his brother would buy one. Even if the quality wasn't as high. Smart people are more concerned with cost than anything else. The sheep who pay too much for a status symbol are just idiots. Sounds like you just might be an idiot.
IF such a company would make a killing, I'm sure that you could start it. We'll see how you do. You sell $250 worth of stuff at $300 and we'll see if you sell enough to make it worth your time and the risk.
I have a sneaking suspicion that people won't go out and buy a $100 upgrade so they can get a new web browser, no matter how slick it is. I doubt it would even be a deciding factor.
Yeah, most of the ones I've seen are 12x12 (and every time I see one I think "why 12?" but whatever).
And while on a fairly good day I can multiply 19 by 21 in my head quickly (my arithmatic skills vary) and even on a crummy day can telly you almost instantly what 47^2* is, I would tend to say that virtually everyone *calculates*, rather than *knows* the answer. Whereas if I say what is 8 times 12, you probably spit out 96 without calculation. Most people here probably know all products of [1-12] times [1-12] witchout really thinking... and hence I would say know their times tables, as generally I think that is what is meant by that phrase.
*There's a neat trick for squaring numbers near 50 I picked up from one of the Feynman books when he told how he learned it from someone elso, maybe Hans Bethe, but I'm not sure. Here it is, with 47 as the example:
47^2 = (50-3)^2 = 50^2 - 2*50*3 + 3^2 =
2500 - 100*3 + 3^2 = 2209
So in a nutshell, take the difference from 50, add or subtract that many hundreds from 2500, then add the square of the number.
This of course works with numbers other than 50, but it's a lot easier to do 2500-3*100 than it is, say 6400-3*160 for 77^2.