You do realize that nearly every tech news site on the planet (including a million or so Mac rumor sites) carried this story before/.? And that everyone was expecting this machine either today or next Tuesday? And that the Apple cult...er, *fans* have been salivating for this since January?
All the wireless Mini cards I've seen are mounted in a manner similar to the manner in which RAM is mounted on a laptop, behind a panel in the base, with a snap-in interface, but with a wire attachment as well. Not something that's going to compete with ExpressCard or PCMCIA. It's basically a small-format PCI.
No, we know from that lawsuit that Apple believed in 1988 that an interface can be legally owned under copyright law, and it learned from that lawsuit that copyright law does not provide protection to "look and feel." Since Apple lost that lawsuit, your invocation of "live by the sword" makes no sense - Apple gained nothing from that lawsuit, so it cannot be said to have in any way earned its living by the same sword of ligitation to which you seem to hope it will die.
He wrote "the enemy." Singular. Not "potential future enemies." And frankly, the problem with this administration is that they're too busy fighting the Cold War to fight the War Against Terrorism. Whatever makes you think that future enemies will be more like the Soviet Union and less like al-Qaida?
The original ads for the Apple II called it "the world's first personal computer," and most people described it in shorthand as a PC. Then IBM came out with its personal computer product, called "The IBM PC," and in effect hijacked the term. Thus "PC-compatible" came to mean "IBM PC compatible," and *PC Magazine* was started to talk about the IBM PC - the first clone came out in 1983.
The technology he uses to look around the corner in that seen is an advanced futuristic device called a mirror. He's looking at a reflection in a mirror in the main scene. Also, the resolution isn't infinite, just very, very, very, very good - but he's at the limits of the resolution at the end of the scene (you can see the grain in the film).
Why both with the Wikipedia article, when you can post links to the inventor's own history of the first web browser (source code; written for NeXTStep for 680x0 I believe).
What I find particularly troubling is that the Administration and its apologists are claiming that Article II, Section 2 trumps the Fourth Amendment. By definition, an Amendment to the Constitutions always takes precedence over the Constitution itself. The Fourth Amendment clearly limits the powers of the Chief Executive as outlined in Article II, Section 2. What's more, Article II, Section 2 grants the president the right to command the Army and Navy, when called into the actual service of the United States. It does not give him sweeping war powers over the civilian population in a time of foreign war. When Republicans are citing Roosevelt's sequestration of Japanese-American citizens as an example of the sweeping powers "the Constitution" grants to the President in a time of war, it's time to look out.
Re:This happens all the time...
on
Faking a Company
·
· Score: 1
You're forgetting about design patents. A lot of the iPod knockoffs may violate Apple's design patents; we'll see.
This sounds a lot like a misunderstanding of a guy I saw a documentary about maybe 10 years ago: his artistic "practice" is to try to pay for things with hand-drawn currency. In his case, the currency is NOT made to look like legal tender - e.g., he'll put MLK on a $100 bill, use lots of bright colors (this was before the preppification of the $20 bill), even put odd names on the bills. He makes no pretence that the money is US legal tender, or the legal tender of any other nation, but he does call it currency, and if the person he offers it to accepts it in payment, he signs it. His bills do, indeed, sell for a great deal more than the face value, if they have been used in a transaction; but the Treasury Department tolerates him because he's not actually counterfeiting money.
Maybe there's another guy out there who hand-draws currency designed to look real, but I doubt it.
If it's anything like the "re-imagining" of this show, count me out. No idea why so many people fall for this show. The new BG is below par in just about every aspect of production. Bad casting choices, terrible acting, cheesy sets, barely acceptable lighting, herky-jerky camera work, exceedingly shallow politically correct plotlines and characters, not to mention the barely concealed pro-USA anti-terrorism propaganda agenda in the writing. [. ..] If the original plan to do a continuation of the original series created by Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto had gone forward, the show, and subsequent spin-offs probably would have been very watchable and entertaining. As it is now, the show has no soul, because it's nothing more than a hijack of someone else's great concept.
Best. Troll. Ever.
C'mon folks. Really. How could someone complain about the bad casting choices, terrible acting, cheesy sets, and exceedingly shallow plotlines and characters, as well as barely concealed propaganda agenda of the newBattlestar Galactica, and then argue for bringing back the OLD Battlestar Galactica, with its absurd casting choices (Laurette Spang, anyone? Nothing like casting by still photo), terrible acting (Maren Jensen), cheesy sets (how many times did we have to see that recreation center?), exceedingly shallow plotlines and characters ("Fire in Space" - what a concept! And can you get more shallow than the old Commander Tigh?), and barely concealed agenda ("War of the Gods" with a bad guy named Iblis - Iblis! I mean, really, sometimes it's the Book of Mormon in Space! - the Colonies = Israel, Earth = the Americas). And don't get me started on the last "continuation" of Battlestar Galactica: SuperScouts!!!
I wouldn't describe VHS as "ancient." VHS was introduced in 1976 (and Beta in 1975). DVD was released in 1996/1997. Twenty years later. Blu-Ray will be introduced in 2006/2007 - ten years after DVD, and thirty after VHS. I don't think that "twice as long before" is quite the same as "ancient". However, in my experience, the VHS adoption rate was *much* slower than DVD adoption rate, especially for commercial movies: VHS really didn't become that popular until the mid-80s, and a lot of people didn't get VCRs until the 90s; but DVD only took about 4 or five years to substantially replace DVD (they stopped selling VHS movies in most places, except for kid's programming and online vendors, about 3 or 4 years ago, though of course they are still used as time-shifting devices and for old video tapes).
I think the important difference is that VHS created the market for owning movies (I remember a discussion as late as 1991 or so with a fellow who couldn't understand why someone would want to own a copy of a movie, since "you only watch them once" - even then, many people thought of VCRs primarily as time-shifting devices). DVD was moving into a market that already existed, and so consumers were ready to "upgrade" to a better format. LD didn't do as well because it wasn't perceived as an upgrade - true, the picture quality was better, but the disks were more expensive, too big, and you had to flip them over halfway through the movie.
So the rest of your argument (the feature difference between DVD and VHS) is very sound: in the end, I think it was the smaller size of the DVD, the fact that you didn't have to rewind DVDs, and the relative resilience of the format that killed VHS, even though DVD was not recordable before VHS started to drop off.
The question is whether the video quality of the formats is high enough to convince people to upgrade. The smart thing would have been to combine the formats (as was done with CDs) and to make sure that new players were released at about the same price point as high-quality DVD players, with DVD and CD built-in. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray don't have that big a window: they need to make a lot of money before increases in bandwidth make physical media delivery of video content obsolete - once it's as easy to download a full-quality 1080p video from an online store as it is to download an album from iTunes today, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will be reduced to the status of the floppy disk.
Think of it as security through obscurity. Not necessarily the best option. And when one of the people using the computer has to run something only available on Windows, what do you do? The problem is far more basic than the security decisions made by individual administrators: the problem is the monoculture that makes using Windows necessary.
Not sure that you really want to hold up the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy as a paragon of accuracy. Keep in mind that
Entries tend to get updated or not across the Sub-Etha Net according to if they read good.
Take for example, the case of Brequinda on the Foth of Avalars, famed in myth, legend and stultifyingly dull tri-d mini-serieses as home of the magnificent and magical Fuolornis Fire Dragon.
[snip]
Not surprisingly, the Guide's graphically enticing description of the general state of affairs on this planet has proved to be astonishingly popular amongst hitch-hikers who allow themselves to be guided by it, and so it has simply never been taken out, and it is therefore left to latter-day travellers to find out for themselves that today's modern Brequinda in the City State of Avalars is now little more than concrete, strip joints and Dragon Burger Bars.
Slashdot Mirror
What distributions are there out there that can handle Apple Airport wireless out of the box? (Hell, or any wireless out of the box.)
There are third party utilities that will provide right-click capabilities, like SideTrack. Also, there's always ctrl-click.
You do realize that nearly every tech news site on the planet (including a million or so Mac rumor sites) carried this story before /.? And that everyone was expecting this machine either today or next Tuesday? And that the Apple cult...er, *fans* have been salivating for this since January?
Funny, my "grandma" is 82 and has no problems at all using her computer.
All the wireless Mini cards I've seen are mounted in a manner similar to the manner in which RAM is mounted on a laptop, behind a panel in the base, with a snap-in interface, but with a wire attachment as well. Not something that's going to compete with ExpressCard or PCMCIA. It's basically a small-format PCI.
No, we know from that lawsuit that Apple believed in 1988 that an interface can be legally owned under copyright law, and it learned from that lawsuit that copyright law does not provide protection to "look and feel." Since Apple lost that lawsuit, your invocation of "live by the sword" makes no sense - Apple gained nothing from that lawsuit, so it cannot be said to have in any way earned its living by the same sword of ligitation to which you seem to hope it will die.
I take it you don't remember the bad old day when you could only lease your telephone or your Xerox.
Yes, very much so. But that was the whole point of Blow-Up - the closer you get, the harder it is to see clearly. Antonioni knew his film.
He wrote "the enemy." Singular. Not "potential future enemies." And frankly, the problem with this administration is that they're too busy fighting the Cold War to fight the War Against Terrorism. Whatever makes you think that future enemies will be more like the Soviet Union and less like al-Qaida?
Yeah, 'cause those al-Qaida satellites are really, really sophisticated.
Everyone complaining that "Han shot first" is doing the happy dance from the original end of Jedi.
The original ads for the Apple II called it "the world's first personal computer," and most people described it in shorthand as a PC. Then IBM came out with its personal computer product, called "The IBM PC," and in effect hijacked the term. Thus "PC-compatible" came to mean "IBM PC compatible," and *PC Magazine* was started to talk about the IBM PC - the first clone came out in 1983.
The technology he uses to look around the corner in that seen is an advanced futuristic device called a mirror. He's looking at a reflection in a mirror in the main scene. Also, the resolution isn't infinite, just very, very, very, very good - but he's at the limits of the resolution at the end of the scene (you can see the grain in the film).
Why both with the Wikipedia article, when you can post links to the inventor's own history of the first web browser (source code; written for NeXTStep for 680x0 I believe).
What I find particularly troubling is that the Administration and its apologists are claiming that Article II, Section 2 trumps the Fourth Amendment. By definition, an Amendment to the Constitutions always takes precedence over the Constitution itself. The Fourth Amendment clearly limits the powers of the Chief Executive as outlined in Article II, Section 2. What's more, Article II, Section 2 grants the president the right to command the Army and Navy, when called into the actual service of the United States. It does not give him sweeping war powers over the civilian population in a time of foreign war. When Republicans are citing Roosevelt's sequestration of Japanese-American citizens as an example of the sweeping powers "the Constitution" grants to the President in a time of war, it's time to look out.
You're forgetting about design patents. A lot of the iPod knockoffs may violate Apple's design patents; we'll see.
Ok, thanks! The guy I'm thinking about is JSG Boggs.
This sounds a lot like a misunderstanding of a guy I saw a documentary about maybe 10 years ago: his artistic "practice" is to try to pay for things with hand-drawn currency. In his case, the currency is NOT made to look like legal tender - e.g., he'll put MLK on a $100 bill, use lots of bright colors (this was before the preppification of the $20 bill), even put odd names on the bills. He makes no pretence that the money is US legal tender, or the legal tender of any other nation, but he does call it currency, and if the person he offers it to accepts it in payment, he signs it. His bills do, indeed, sell for a great deal more than the face value, if they have been used in a transaction; but the Treasury Department tolerates him because he's not actually counterfeiting money.
Maybe there's another guy out there who hand-draws currency designed to look real, but I doubt it.
If it's anything like the "re-imagining" of this show, count me out. No idea why so many people fall for this show. The new BG is below par in just about every aspect of production. Bad casting choices, terrible acting, cheesy sets, barely acceptable lighting, herky-jerky camera work, exceedingly shallow politically correct plotlines and characters, not to mention the barely concealed pro-USA anti-terrorism propaganda agenda in the writing. [. . .] If the original plan to do a continuation of the original series created by Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto had gone forward, the show, and subsequent spin-offs probably would have been very watchable and entertaining. As it is now, the show has no soul, because it's nothing more than a hijack of someone else's great concept.
Best. Troll. Ever.
C'mon folks. Really. How could someone complain about the bad casting choices, terrible acting, cheesy sets, and exceedingly shallow plotlines and characters, as well as barely concealed propaganda agenda of the new Battlestar Galactica, and then argue for bringing back the OLD Battlestar Galactica, with its absurd casting choices (Laurette Spang, anyone? Nothing like casting by still photo), terrible acting (Maren Jensen), cheesy sets (how many times did we have to see that recreation center?), exceedingly shallow plotlines and characters ("Fire in Space" - what a concept! And can you get more shallow than the old Commander Tigh?), and barely concealed agenda ("War of the Gods" with a bad guy named Iblis - Iblis! I mean, really, sometimes it's the Book of Mormon in Space! - the Colonies = Israel, Earth = the Americas). And don't get me started on the last "continuation" of Battlestar Galactica: SuperScouts!!!
YHBT!.
The Apple iPod telescreen ...
... just smile into the face of the iPod.
To raise or lower volume - just twist your finger in the air above your iPod.
To select a song - just snap your fingers in the air above your iPod.
To tell Steve Jobs you love him
I wouldn't describe VHS as "ancient." VHS was introduced in 1976 (and Beta in 1975). DVD was released in 1996/1997. Twenty years later. Blu-Ray will be introduced in 2006/2007 - ten years after DVD, and thirty after VHS. I don't think that "twice as long before" is quite the same as "ancient". However, in my experience, the VHS adoption rate was *much* slower than DVD adoption rate, especially for commercial movies: VHS really didn't become that popular until the mid-80s, and a lot of people didn't get VCRs until the 90s; but DVD only took about 4 or five years to substantially replace DVD (they stopped selling VHS movies in most places, except for kid's programming and online vendors, about 3 or 4 years ago, though of course they are still used as time-shifting devices and for old video tapes).
I think the important difference is that VHS created the market for owning movies (I remember a discussion as late as 1991 or so with a fellow who couldn't understand why someone would want to own a copy of a movie, since "you only watch them once" - even then, many people thought of VCRs primarily as time-shifting devices). DVD was moving into a market that already existed, and so consumers were ready to "upgrade" to a better format. LD didn't do as well because it wasn't perceived as an upgrade - true, the picture quality was better, but the disks were more expensive, too big, and you had to flip them over halfway through the movie.
So the rest of your argument (the feature difference between DVD and VHS) is very sound: in the end, I think it was the smaller size of the DVD, the fact that you didn't have to rewind DVDs, and the relative resilience of the format that killed VHS, even though DVD was not recordable before VHS started to drop off.
The question is whether the video quality of the formats is high enough to convince people to upgrade. The smart thing would have been to combine the formats (as was done with CDs) and to make sure that new players were released at about the same price point as high-quality DVD players, with DVD and CD built-in. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray don't have that big a window: they need to make a lot of money before increases in bandwidth make physical media delivery of video content obsolete - once it's as easy to download a full-quality 1080p video from an online store as it is to download an album from iTunes today, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will be reduced to the status of the floppy disk.
If you don't mind using a browser interface with that https, you should get Strongspace. They also give you rsync.
Think of it as security through obscurity. Not necessarily the best option. And when one of the people using the computer has to run something only available on Windows, what do you do? The problem is far more basic than the security decisions made by individual administrators: the problem is the monoculture that makes using Windows necessary.
You can tell your ex-colleagues that at least one customer was won over to Macs by seeing Airport at work at an academic conference in 1999.
Not sure that you really want to hold up the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy as a paragon of accuracy. Keep in mind that
Entries tend to get updated or not across the Sub-Etha Net according to if they read good.
Take for example, the case of Brequinda on the Foth of Avalars, famed in myth, legend and stultifyingly dull tri-d mini-serieses as home of the magnificent and magical Fuolornis Fire Dragon.
[snip]
Not surprisingly, the Guide's graphically enticing description of the general state of affairs on this planet has proved to be astonishingly popular amongst hitch-hikers who allow themselves to be guided by it, and so it has simply never been taken out, and it is therefore left to latter-day travellers to find out for themselves that today's modern Brequinda in the City State of Avalars is now little more than concrete, strip joints and Dragon Burger Bars.