I believe I will need a armband to get functionality I really want with current technology. Currently a watch face is too small for me to get meaningful information. A 2.5 inch curved display that curves with my wrist/arm and fastened with a clasp or band. Integrated celluar bits to be free from my phone. One day battery life is good enough (match my current phone). This would let me replace my phone for almost all tasks. I could not only communicate (very possible with voice and current smart watches), but consume as well.
The current crop of smart watches and Apple's "Watch" are not good for consuming anything complex like a longer email, webpage, book, YouTube, etc. Payment processing is interesting, but for something I do only a couple of times a day not a core feature I want. Same goes for things like boarding passes and hotel keys; I don't do those things enough for it to matter. I also don't go shopping enough to care about iBeacons and extra information popping on my watch.
At this point I know for the most part what I want after having used: Casio calculator watch, Palm Pilot, Palm VII, an original iPAQ, BlackBerries from 2005 to 2009, Palm Treo, and since then Android devices. I'll probably pickup a smart watch of some kind in the next year once they get closer to what I want them to do. In a couple of years bezels, battery life, etc should have enough changes that they will do exactly what I want, but if not it will be an armband.
I can't believe they're doing this. I don't care if a review is paid or not. If I can't think analytically or critical about a review(er) then I deserve what I get.
How does the process even work. Can I go around submitting tons of accusations to an FTC site about any random blog? How are they defining a blog or blogger? How does a blogger defend themselves from accusations?
On a separate issue, this is really terrible reporting. There is almost no information.
The main value in newspapers previously was their distribution network. They had a system in place to distribute information. Radio, TV, and the internet all compete with them for information systems. Each one added more competition, lower latency, and broader reach. In short they provided better value. A daily delivery of dead tree is a non-optimal delivery system.
It is getting boring hearing about newspapers and TV news dieing. Why care? The replacement is here. It is better, faster, cheaper. It is the internet.
This says alot more about how useless most of school is. Typing is important, but what are children doing for 99.99% of the time that learning touch typing can be considered such an important cornerstone.
If cashback is something they keep around for two years or more I consider it as part of the search engine. At two years or more it must be part of their business model.
They're accountable to their customers, their shareholders, and their potential customers they want. There is a reason most people who have the money send their children to private schools: they're usually better.
No it doesn't need to be regulated as the cost of the water would go up. You or your neighbor then cut back on the amount of water you use. If you don't cut back then there is enough money around to bring a supply of water that you are both demanding at that price point. No government regulation needed and the problem gets taken care of.
"So what it boils down to is that the Republicans, by their actions, have proven that they firmly believe in deficit spending, that we can borrow an endless amount of money for whatever our government wants to do. So yes, party allegiance makes a difference: if they're Republicans, they simply don't believe in following a budget."
That is what Obama is doing right now.
I'd like to spend the $5 where I want it spent. Preferably on something that makes me more productive. Might be food, might be entertainment, but I don't want to pay someone to dig holes. They could be producing something useful for the world.
Digging holes will never be "responsible investing". It is no better than trading houses back and forth at increased prices each time. No where in my post did I say there should be neither no government nor taxation and I'm not quite sure where you're getting that from in my post. I do however sarcastically imply I want my money to be used productively instead of for hole digging.
You should check out Clearspace (http://www.jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace). We looked into the product when searching for collaboration software. Ultimately we didn't pick it since it didn't fit our needs quite right, however it sounds perfect for you. Builtin forums, user profiles, wikis, and a host of other things.
You are right (I think). I was trying to say is we shouldn't be worried about the investors who lost money as the information needed to better asses the risks is now known. Perhaps one of the exchanges could do their own investigation and bar the potential perpatrators from trading. No need to get the SEC involved and create more taxpayer cost.
People with the burden and responsibility of thinking for theirselves will be able to assess the risks of trusting an unknown information source just fine. New filters have already been created to make the unknown sources trustable. I don't understand why their is an investigation. Now the story has publicity people can assess the risks more correctly. No need for the law to get involved.
It only can prove not to trust Wikipedia fully: Wikipedia is corruptible and can be manipulated. Both have been known from the start. Not news and not confirming Chomsky.
Have everyone who agrees to the current spec leave the committees or what not and create a new organization publishing the spec. Make sure everyone agrees that the next version is not to have any MS involvment. Let MS do what they want. Let everyone else do what they want as well.
Create their own standard. Companies, organizations, and individuals can create standards away from this. It is not like this is the only option. Take what you have and go play somewhere else, leaving Microsoft to theirselves.
I imagine though, Microsoft buying in is needed more by the people in these standard organizations than Microsoft needs their seal of approval.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe I will need a armband to get functionality I really want with current technology. Currently a watch face is too small for me to get meaningful information. A 2.5 inch curved display that curves with my wrist/arm and fastened with a clasp or band. Integrated celluar bits to be free from my phone. One day battery life is good enough (match my current phone). This would let me replace my phone for almost all tasks. I could not only communicate (very possible with voice and current smart watches), but consume as well. The current crop of smart watches and Apple's "Watch" are not good for consuming anything complex like a longer email, webpage, book, YouTube, etc. Payment processing is interesting, but for something I do only a couple of times a day not a core feature I want. Same goes for things like boarding passes and hotel keys; I don't do those things enough for it to matter. I also don't go shopping enough to care about iBeacons and extra information popping on my watch. At this point I know for the most part what I want after having used: Casio calculator watch, Palm Pilot, Palm VII, an original iPAQ, BlackBerries from 2005 to 2009, Palm Treo, and since then Android devices. I'll probably pickup a smart watch of some kind in the next year once they get closer to what I want them to do. In a couple of years bezels, battery life, etc should have enough changes that they will do exactly what I want, but if not it will be an armband.
That wouldn't last. People would demand changes as they saw their children miss out on higher education opportunities.
Why should anyone be required to do this. It is their pipes. They own it. They run it. They should be able to do what they want.
I can't believe they're doing this. I don't care if a review is paid or not. If I can't think analytically or critical about a review(er) then I deserve what I get. How does the process even work. Can I go around submitting tons of accusations to an FTC site about any random blog? How are they defining a blog or blogger? How does a blogger defend themselves from accusations? On a separate issue, this is really terrible reporting. There is almost no information.
The main value in newspapers previously was their distribution network. They had a system in place to distribute information. Radio, TV, and the internet all compete with them for information systems. Each one added more competition, lower latency, and broader reach. In short they provided better value. A daily delivery of dead tree is a non-optimal delivery system. It is getting boring hearing about newspapers and TV news dieing. Why care? The replacement is here. It is better, faster, cheaper. It is the internet.
The government is supposed to protecty my rights. Especially my private property rights.
This says alot more about how useless most of school is. Typing is important, but what are children doing for 99.99% of the time that learning touch typing can be considered such an important cornerstone.
If cashback is something they keep around for two years or more I consider it as part of the search engine. At two years or more it must be part of their business model.
They're accountable to their customers, their shareholders, and their potential customers they want. There is a reason most people who have the money send their children to private schools: they're usually better.
Yes I remember how it was shot down. It was flying the same path over and over. It's LO not "stealth"
No it doesn't need to be regulated as the cost of the water would go up. You or your neighbor then cut back on the amount of water you use. If you don't cut back then there is enough money around to bring a supply of water that you are both demanding at that price point. No government regulation needed and the problem gets taken care of.
But we're ruining the planet! I watched a movie and food comes from cruel treatment of nature true story! Nature first! Humans second!
"So what it boils down to is that the Republicans, by their actions, have proven that they firmly believe in deficit spending, that we can borrow an endless amount of money for whatever our government wants to do. So yes, party allegiance makes a difference: if they're Republicans, they simply don't believe in following a budget." That is what Obama is doing right now.
So the least expensive item is more environmentally friendly. Who could have known?!
Are they correlated or one causes the other? I don't think its clear.
I'd like to spend the $5 where I want it spent. Preferably on something that makes me more productive. Might be food, might be entertainment, but I don't want to pay someone to dig holes. They could be producing something useful for the world. Digging holes will never be "responsible investing". It is no better than trading houses back and forth at increased prices each time. No where in my post did I say there should be neither no government nor taxation and I'm not quite sure where you're getting that from in my post. I do however sarcastically imply I want my money to be used productively instead of for hole digging.
Dig more holes faster please. Thanks for taking my hard earned rewards for work and giving it to someone else. I really appreciate it government.
Many people failing to pay their student loans is as much of a systemic risk as AIG failing.
I wonder if kids had some kind of job if they would be less likely to steal or break the law.
You should check out Clearspace (http://www.jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace). We looked into the product when searching for collaboration software. Ultimately we didn't pick it since it didn't fit our needs quite right, however it sounds perfect for you. Builtin forums, user profiles, wikis, and a host of other things.
You are right (I think). I was trying to say is we shouldn't be worried about the investors who lost money as the information needed to better asses the risks is now known. Perhaps one of the exchanges could do their own investigation and bar the potential perpatrators from trading. No need to get the SEC involved and create more taxpayer cost.
People with the burden and responsibility of thinking for theirselves will be able to assess the risks of trusting an unknown information source just fine. New filters have already been created to make the unknown sources trustable. I don't understand why their is an investigation. Now the story has publicity people can assess the risks more correctly. No need for the law to get involved.
It only can prove not to trust Wikipedia fully: Wikipedia is corruptible and can be manipulated. Both have been known from the start. Not news and not confirming Chomsky.
Have everyone who agrees to the current spec leave the committees or what not and create a new organization publishing the spec. Make sure everyone agrees that the next version is not to have any MS involvment. Let MS do what they want. Let everyone else do what they want as well.
Create their own standard. Companies, organizations, and individuals can create standards away from this. It is not like this is the only option. Take what you have and go play somewhere else, leaving Microsoft to theirselves. I imagine though, Microsoft buying in is needed more by the people in these standard organizations than Microsoft needs their seal of approval.