Re:It's like nothing we've seen .. since Linux
on
A New Kind of OS
·
· Score: 1
They mean an OS that changes with you, without you having to do it with coding. If Linux could do that, it would be MUCH better.
Put some useful meat on that suggestion and you may become a millionaire. "The computer should adapt to the user, not the other way 'round" is not new, the problem is it's a vague aspiration which has proven difficult to nail down in any useful way. Microsoft's latest products automatically hide menu items unless you use them often, and frankly I hate it.
The real, industrial-strength pseudo-scholars who want to watch TV rather than crack a book turn their tight-leather-clad attention spans toward Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Are you honestly arguing that contemporary pop culture is best observed through books rather than television? I direct you to some comparative stats on readership vs TV viewership. (And I have to question whether they corrected for "I'm lying because reading is high-class whereas watching hours of TV every day is embarrassing.")
Remember there's also a screen, a high-end video-card and other power sucking elements.
If the CPU isn't all that bad, I wonder what those other power-sucking elements are? My T40 already has a 7200 RPM drive and 1GB of RAM. I would expect a powerful video card to zap the battery if I were playing games, but not while I'm writing a document. And I would not expect a battery life test to be carried out at max brightness for the screen, either. Nevertheless the claim of a 7 hour Core 2 duo laptop is reassuring, even assuming it falls a bit short of claims.
Thanks, that is a better article. But I'm still confused about battery life. They claim only about 100 minutes for the new memron just reading a document in netscape? How can it be that bad? I wonder if they had all the power-saving features enabled? My 3 year old Pentium-M 1.6 GHz T40 with a fresh battery goes for 5-6 hours. Can't I run the fancy new chips at reduced speed to get good battery life when I need it? Since they are comparable, can somebody with a current Core Duo laptop comment on this?
No need for clean water, roads and basic education. Nope: give them computers & wikipedia.
This comes up every time. I'm sure there's truth to it. But it's wrong to expect that countries coming along now will go through the same process of stable government, agrarian society, industrialization, service based economy, information based economy as has happened in the past. If and when those parts of Africa come around, they will get it all in parallel. People may have cell phones before they have running water in their homes. (Or we might be seeing cellphone videos uploaded from refugee camps by people who don't even have homes!) Having rich information resources, be it through PCs or instead through the cellphone, might help everything else along tremendously.
Re:But youtube isn't usually funny!
on
Bob Saget 2.0
·
· Score: 1
And that is why YouTube != "Funniest Home Videos" - because it's more directly audience driven. I don't think YouTube has a crotch-driven "formula" at all... people upload what they want, then other people watch what they want. YouTube supplies various viewship statistics to help the process along. The result may be that YouTube is lowbrow, but the blame has to be far wider than whoever is providing the bandwidth. It's just usenet for videos.
I guess the source I heard was referring to all the Palestinian prisoners, and not just the Lebanese.
You know, I am not even saying that Hezbollah is "right." Far from it. But some others in this thread are dismissive of this issue of "proportionality," and I think it is very important. Yes it's disgusting that an Israeli child died from being hit with a rifle. But - and this is the question - is hundredfold payback from Israel going to fix it? I am seeing mass burials in Lebanon. Scores of children killed by Israel. And it is supposed to be OK because they deliver bombs from high-tech American-made airplanes intead of backpacks. We are constantly reminded of Iran's support for Hezbollah and how many rockets they fire into Israel, often without mention of US support of Israel and how many mortars are lobbed into Lebanon. We pretend the US can still take a leading role in brokering Middleast talks when we have a horse in the race, which we back no matter what. I do not think we're on the path to peace.
Israel bears most of the blame for the latest crisis in Lebanon. They launched an invasion on the pretense of searching for two captured soldiers, even though they themselves were holding hundreds (thousands?) of captured hezbollah soldiers, and had been repeatedly warned of what would happen if they kept ignoring calls for prisoner exchange or release. And it wasn't just disproportionate, it was against the wrong people entirely... Israel intentionally targeted Lebanese civilian infrastructure hoping to turn them against Hazbollah.
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather live in Israel than Lebanon any day because I share more of Israel's values, generally. But that doesn't justify every thing that they do.
Now let's be realistic for a moment, which country do you think is more likely to be invaded and overthrown within the next 5 years, Israel or Iran? Especially given that Israel has (probably) already achieved the nuclear ambitions Iran is accused of harboring. After watching Iraq get invaded and overthrown for failing to prove they had no WMD, when in fact they did not, can you imagine why Iran might want a nuclear deterrent? I suppose it is still best to stop them from getting it, but I think it is very disingenous to act all surprised and outraged when Iran pursues parity with their rivals.
Whatever. It's easy to criticize RMS, except that his ideas have turned out to be wildly successful, and he will be long-remembered. I enjoy the benefits of OSS every day, even though it doesn't meet all my needs like he wishes it would (and so do I).
You could write a book about engineering companies that have gone down the tubes when the beancounters took over and immediately slashed all that "wasteful" basic research.
It's not that easy to establish cause and effect though. It's true that when companies start to go downhill they cut R&D (long-term investements) first, so it could be the other way around from what you describe.
The fact is, considering how much money Microsoft takes in every year, it's amazing how little new stuff they actually put out. Almost all of their profit comes from products that are hardly different now than they were 4 years ago. They can't be lean and mean because they've never had to be. Windows and Office guarantee them a huge, permanant income stream. I think Micrsoft management would just as soon spend all that money building their own empires rather than giving it to shareholders. Look at how Microsoft resisted paying dividends, despite having more cash than they know what to do with. Gates is giving away billions from his own pocket, do you really think he lies awake worrying that some Microsofties aren't contributing to the bottom line as much as they could? I don't even blame them, I'd love to work at MS Research with backing like that. But from an investor's viewpoint it's not efficient.
You don't think Creative or Apple are going to eat that cost do you?
I don't think they have any choice. Their prices were already set to maximize their profit, whatever it may cost them to make the product really isn't relevant. Say you're selling your car and decide you need to get higher than market value for it because you're upside-down on the loan. Do you really think any potential buyers accept that reason and pay extra for your car? So, yes, judgements like this come from profits instead of consumers.
Think about the mafia... they don't go around suing guys for ripping off $100,000... they break their legs.
All law ultimately boils down to military or police force. Just see what happens if you start out with a minor infraction, say driving 10 mph over the limit, and then ignore or resist the progressively more forceful efforts by the government to make you comply. As for the mafia? Internally, it is not anarchy. It couldn't thrive without a code of conduct that amounts to "law." At the same time, its methods would never work on the scale of an entire society. They are leeches, they can't survive without productive victims to exploit. Look at the corrupt governments around the world, those nations do not thrive.
I guess it all depends how narrowly you defend "market." I suppose there would always be some bartering. But even the idea of property itself is a legal construct.
Thank you, that was my question. The biggest issue with projectors seems to be cost, output, and efficiency of the light source itself. Unless the lasers are far more efficient than the lamps used in today's projectors (which aren't bright enough yet require a noisy fan), I don't see how the problem could be solved. I REALLY wish we could get reflective instead of emissive displays!
If you are smart enough to scam people and you do it using the ingame restrictions (eg not using any bugs) CCP will not step in and crush you
What's "smart" about it? Free marketeers think they hate laws, what they forget is that the market is a system of laws, without which there is no market. If there is no contract law in this game, then constructs like banks will simply be untenable, since there's no reason to think the other guy will hold up his end of the bargain. End result, no economy of interest. How is that good?
The Nano is *very* thin. I think 2x the capacity for 2x the thickness plus a radio is a good tradeoff. All(?) the other iPod models are over 2x the thickness of the Nano and seem to have sold OK.
Anyways, maybe I'm unusual by for me radio is a must. Sometimes I want to listen to the news, or (gasp!) get sick of my music collection and flip through the stations.
Unless you're bill gates, your "home theater" isn't even close to that 3-story high screen.
Not true. With a livingroom projector setup, you can throw a picture as big as you would ever want it to be from couch-viewing distance. And then there's the sound, which is better at home. You sit in the sweet spot, and you control the volume.
However loving your family is, they're simply not the same as an enthusiastic sold-out crowd.
I suppose "Snakes" is somewhat unusual in that respect. Usually I'd rather not be aware of the other people, especially if a really tall guy happens to be sitting in front of me.
But now there is an alternative to watching movies with random teenagers: home theater. When you were a kid, there were no DVDs. DVD is much better than VHS (in every way: release date, price, video and audio quality, extras...) whereas the theater has hardly improved at all, yet has gone up in price. The gap between theater and home theater has narrowed, and some would say they've traded places.
To amplify your point, one reason academics might be willing to reveal a technique even if it actually works, is because it may well require a tremendous amount of capital to make a significant profit without a high probability of going broke first. Expectations (average returns) are based on the law of large numbers, and not terribly useful unless you have some large numbers ($$$) to play with.
That is a little odd. I put my "buy it now" price a little above what I think I'll most likely get. Then people have the incentive that for just a couple bucks extra they can save a lot of wasted effort on bidding and waiting to be outbid, and I get a couple extra bucks, or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, that is a better article. But I'm still confused about battery life. They claim only about 100 minutes for the new memron just reading a document in netscape? How can it be that bad? I wonder if they had all the power-saving features enabled? My 3 year old Pentium-M 1.6 GHz T40 with a fresh battery goes for 5-6 hours. Can't I run the fancy new chips at reduced speed to get good battery life when I need it? Since they are comparable, can somebody with a current Core Duo laptop comment on this?
And that is why YouTube != "Funniest Home Videos" - because it's more directly audience driven. I don't think YouTube has a crotch-driven "formula" at all... people upload what they want, then other people watch what they want. YouTube supplies various viewship statistics to help the process along. The result may be that YouTube is lowbrow, but the blame has to be far wider than whoever is providing the bandwidth. It's just usenet for videos.
You know, I am not even saying that Hezbollah is "right." Far from it. But some others in this thread are dismissive of this issue of "proportionality," and I think it is very important. Yes it's disgusting that an Israeli child died from being hit with a rifle. But - and this is the question - is hundredfold payback from Israel going to fix it? I am seeing mass burials in Lebanon. Scores of children killed by Israel. And it is supposed to be OK because they deliver bombs from high-tech American-made airplanes intead of backpacks. We are constantly reminded of Iran's support for Hezbollah and how many rockets they fire into Israel, often without mention of US support of Israel and how many mortars are lobbed into Lebanon. We pretend the US can still take a leading role in brokering Middleast talks when we have a horse in the race, which we back no matter what. I do not think we're on the path to peace.
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather live in Israel than Lebanon any day because I share more of Israel's values, generally. But that doesn't justify every thing that they do.
Now let's be realistic for a moment, which country do you think is more likely to be invaded and overthrown within the next 5 years, Israel or Iran? Especially given that Israel has (probably) already achieved the nuclear ambitions Iran is accused of harboring. After watching Iraq get invaded and overthrown for failing to prove they had no WMD, when in fact they did not, can you imagine why Iran might want a nuclear deterrent? I suppose it is still best to stop them from getting it, but I think it is very disingenous to act all surprised and outraged when Iran pursues parity with their rivals.
Whatever. It's easy to criticize RMS, except that his ideas have turned out to be wildly successful, and he will be long-remembered. I enjoy the benefits of OSS every day, even though it doesn't meet all my needs like he wishes it would (and so do I).
The fact is, considering how much money Microsoft takes in every year, it's amazing how little new stuff they actually put out. Almost all of their profit comes from products that are hardly different now than they were 4 years ago. They can't be lean and mean because they've never had to be. Windows and Office guarantee them a huge, permanant income stream. I think Micrsoft management would just as soon spend all that money building their own empires rather than giving it to shareholders. Look at how Microsoft resisted paying dividends, despite having more cash than they know what to do with. Gates is giving away billions from his own pocket, do you really think he lies awake worrying that some Microsofties aren't contributing to the bottom line as much as they could? I don't even blame them, I'd love to work at MS Research with backing like that. But from an investor's viewpoint it's not efficient.
I guess it all depends how narrowly you defend "market." I suppose there would always be some bartering. But even the idea of property itself is a legal construct.
Thank you, that was my question. The biggest issue with projectors seems to be cost, output, and efficiency of the light source itself. Unless the lasers are far more efficient than the lamps used in today's projectors (which aren't bright enough yet require a noisy fan), I don't see how the problem could be solved. I REALLY wish we could get reflective instead of emissive displays!
Won't the Admins just zero out the fraudster's "bank account" and be done with it?
Anyways, maybe I'm unusual by for me radio is a must. Sometimes I want to listen to the news, or (gasp!) get sick of my music collection and flip through the stations.
...so what you're saying is they should include an "audience" audio track on the DVD release? :)
But now there is an alternative to watching movies with random teenagers: home theater. When you were a kid, there were no DVDs. DVD is much better than VHS (in every way: release date, price, video and audio quality, extras...) whereas the theater has hardly improved at all, yet has gone up in price. The gap between theater and home theater has narrowed, and some would say they've traded places.
To amplify your point, one reason academics might be willing to reveal a technique even if it actually works, is because it may well require a tremendous amount of capital to make a significant profit without a high probability of going broke first. Expectations (average returns) are based on the law of large numbers, and not terribly useful unless you have some large numbers ($$$) to play with.
That is a little odd. I put my "buy it now" price a little above what I think I'll most likely get. Then people have the incentive that for just a couple bucks extra they can save a lot of wasted effort on bidding and waiting to be outbid, and I get a couple extra bucks, or not.