Probably. The RIAA had a lot more clout against Apple when the airport express and AirTunes was introduced than they do now though. Apparently Apple isn't worried about the MPAA objecting to their recent negligence in not encrypting the video (and audio associated with video) portion of AirPlay.
I didn't say warfighting technology didn't advance. If you read carefully, I said new technology was seen as dishonourable when it was introduced. It was resisted, and took much longer to catch on than it might otherwise have.
Gunpowder took a thousand years to catch on in Europe as a weapon. When the Japanese ended up with some muskets they went nuts producing them, fought a horrible war, then banned them from their islands. You pointed out yourself how the church (not the nobility directly) tried to ban crossbows. Nobody wanted to believe battleships were essentially helpless before aircraft until Billy Mitchell's demonstration, and even then there was resistance to shifting to carrier-centred navies.
The GGP's quote "generals are equipped to fight the last war" is true not because generals are a bunch of incompetents, but rather because if they have to fight again they WANT to fight the last war, not a new, bloodier kind.
The Airport Express AP has an audio out jack. An iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad or iTunes can route music to that device. Unfortunately when it was introduced Apple decided to encrypt the stream so only Airport Expresses were valid receivers. Now anything that has a network connection and can run a program can be the receiver.
It's a media streaming protocol supported by a lot of phones, music players and the majority of tablets out there. And now it can be supported, sender and receiver, by anything that can run custom software.
I doubt it. I think Apple has gotten tired of encrypting AirTunes anyway. Despite the title of the article, AirPlay is not encrypted - only the music portion which is really AirTunes. So it was easy to write an AirTunes receiver for video and photos but not music, I suspect due mostly to historical reasons.
Most wars before WWI were contests between monarchs. The actual people couldn't care less who won - it's not like their lives would get any better. War was supposed to be fought by honourable opponents armed with more or less the same weapons.
Bows and arrows, firearms, airplanes, submarines, all were seen as dishonourable killing-at-a-distance weapons when they were introduced, reflecting the Homeric influence on our military tradition.
"Yes, the Soviets may have reached the early Space Race milestones before the US did, but the Russians are still using the EXACT SAME launch vehicle, 50 years later, that put up their first satellite. It's like sprinting the first mile of a marathon and dropping out. The US paced itself and finished the race, and as an avid space exploration fan, I feel no need to "blunt the impact." (I kind of enjoy the irony.)"
Well, sort of. You might enjoy the irony even more realizing that the US is currently contracting the Russians and their exact same launch vehicle to provide supplies (now) and human transport (after the shuttle retires) to the space station.
Those are F1 rockets, forming the first stage of a Saturn V. See the guy standing in front of them? That's Werner von Braun, the famous Nazi rocket designer, who played a key role in designing those rockets. Wikipedia says he was their "creator."
Regardless of how you feel about the US's decision to cover up for and make off with former Nazi scientists (the USSR did quite a bit of that too), making up history to fit your own ranting, and worse, telling everyone else to learn from history, isn't going to help anything.
As far as I can see it's basically the same as the dockable toolbars in previous versions of Office except that it's permanently docked and takes up a lot of real estate that could be better used for the actual document you're working on.
I guess if previous versions of Office for Windows didn't have context sensitive toolbars it would be an improvement.
Too bad you posted as AC. There are a lot of comments here talking bout "filler classes" from people who quite obviously didn't spend enough time in a decent English class.
Non-CS scientists who think they know how to program are dangerous. There's an attitude in science that programming is easy and grad students should be able to just do it. You wouldn't trust a mechanical engineering student with no training in wet lab work to sequence DNA, so why would you trust a biology student with no specific programming training to write software you depend on? Yet people do, all the time. Nobody seems to specifically hire a CS specialist for their lab and when one gets in by accident (like me), their advice is generally ignored until something catastrophic happens.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably. The RIAA had a lot more clout against Apple when the airport express and AirTunes was introduced than they do now though. Apparently Apple isn't worried about the MPAA objecting to their recent negligence in not encrypting the video (and audio associated with video) portion of AirPlay.
Well, you've got one. And it's a big one.
Other reasons I stated - AirPlay is supported natively by millions of phones, music players and tablets. And also by one of the leading media players.
Whoops, should be: when it became AirPLAY....
Not when the Airport Express was introduced. I believe Apple only started licensing it when it became AirTunes, quite recently.
I didn't say warfighting technology didn't advance. If you read carefully, I said new technology was seen as dishonourable when it was introduced. It was resisted, and took much longer to catch on than it might otherwise have.
Gunpowder took a thousand years to catch on in Europe as a weapon. When the Japanese ended up with some muskets they went nuts producing them, fought a horrible war, then banned them from their islands. You pointed out yourself how the church (not the nobility directly) tried to ban crossbows. Nobody wanted to believe battleships were essentially helpless before aircraft until Billy Mitchell's demonstration, and even then there was resistance to shifting to carrier-centred navies.
The GGP's quote "generals are equipped to fight the last war" is true not because generals are a bunch of incompetents, but rather because if they have to fight again they WANT to fight the last war, not a new, bloodier kind.
The Airport Express AP has an audio out jack. An iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad or iTunes can route music to that device. Unfortunately when it was introduced Apple decided to encrypt the stream so only Airport Expresses were valid receivers. Now anything that has a network connection and can run a program can be the receiver.
It's a media streaming protocol supported by a lot of phones, music players and the majority of tablets out there. And now it can be supported, sender and receiver, by anything that can run custom software.
Sounds like a pretty good target to me.
There is no AirPlay private key. Only an AirTunes private key, and no, I don't think it's on a per device basis.
AirPlay, except the subset of it that was AirTunes, isn't encrypted. There's a free AirTunes receiver here: http://ericasadun.com/category/airplayer/
I doubt it. I think Apple has gotten tired of encrypting AirTunes anyway. Despite the title of the article, AirPlay is not encrypted - only the music portion which is really AirTunes. So it was easy to write an AirTunes receiver for video and photos but not music, I suspect due mostly to historical reasons.
Most wars before WWI were contests between monarchs. The actual people couldn't care less who won - it's not like their lives would get any better. War was supposed to be fought by honourable opponents armed with more or less the same weapons.
Bows and arrows, firearms, airplanes, submarines, all were seen as dishonourable killing-at-a-distance weapons when they were introduced, reflecting the Homeric influence on our military tradition.
Sure, the speedboat thing is a red herring. A laser on a ship is MUCH more useful for shooting down anti-ship missiles.
"Yes, the Soviets may have reached the early Space Race milestones before the US did, but the Russians are still using the EXACT SAME launch vehicle, 50 years later, that put up their first satellite. It's like sprinting the first mile of a marathon and dropping out. The US paced itself and finished the race, and as an avid space exploration fan, I feel no need to "blunt the impact." (I kind of enjoy the irony.)"
Well, sort of. You might enjoy the irony even more realizing that the US is currently contracting the Russians and their exact same launch vehicle to provide supplies (now) and human transport (after the shuttle retires) to the space station.
Hey mods, not insightful. As others pointed out, and the article states, Gagarin was in orbit. Shepherd, the American follow on, wasn't.
Also, take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S-IC_engines_and_Von_Braun.jpg
Those are F1 rockets, forming the first stage of a Saturn V. See the guy standing in front of them? That's Werner von Braun, the famous Nazi rocket designer, who played a key role in designing those rockets. Wikipedia says he was their "creator."
Regardless of how you feel about the US's decision to cover up for and make off with former Nazi scientists (the USSR did quite a bit of that too), making up history to fit your own ranting, and worse, telling everyone else to learn from history, isn't going to help anything.
As far as I can see it's basically the same as the dockable toolbars in previous versions of Office except that it's permanently docked and takes up a lot of real estate that could be better used for the actual document you're working on.
I guess if previous versions of Office for Windows didn't have context sensitive toolbars it would be an improvement.
"Does OS X have a tablet mode similar to Windows Phone 7's UI"
Yes, they call it iOS.
"or a ribbon interface"
I still don't really see how a "ribbon" is different than a toolbar. OS X has lots of those.
Even if they haven't expired, where are these patents? Patents are part of the public record. Let's see some of these amazing engine designs.
Too bad you posted as AC. There are a lot of comments here talking bout "filler classes" from people who quite obviously didn't spend enough time in a decent English class.
Lots of people seem to have contradictory personalities, or lose their minds a bit as they get older. Look at James Watson.
Just because Woz made a computer in his garage in the 70s doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about now.
Schools teach, then measure how well you've acquired a set of skills that society has decided everyone should have.
The real trained navy staff who are subject to court martial are less likely to ram one of these things into a tanker to see what will happen.
Then Bob should link clearly to the source, or, better, the Slashdot summary should have both, CLEARLY marked.
This article doesn't seem to have a link to the actual source. You have to take a link that is there and remove part of it.
The drones are surface vessels, not subs.
Med students are undergrads.
Non-CS scientists who think they know how to program are dangerous. There's an attitude in science that programming is easy and grad students should be able to just do it. You wouldn't trust a mechanical engineering student with no training in wet lab work to sequence DNA, so why would you trust a biology student with no specific programming training to write software you depend on? Yet people do, all the time. Nobody seems to specifically hire a CS specialist for their lab and when one gets in by accident (like me), their advice is generally ignored until something catastrophic happens.
Yup. And that is how you get to be an economic colony. I think you Americans fought a war to avoid that once, didn't you?