There are two sorts of news. One is the stuff you find in cheapo rags like "Metro" and the other free newspapers. Also when you read news.google.com, the reuters and associated press feeds.
This is the news of what people want you to hear. Press statements as it were.
But the second meaning of news, as in information, reporting, investigation, that you won't get. That is the author of an article using his/her experience and wisdom to question the information that was fed to him and dig deeper.
news: RIAA claims piracy costs more money then exists in the world and they do this while their members reported record profits just last week, how come?
The first is easy, there is always someone somewhere willing to put out a press release, the second is incredibly hard and expensive and has a limited market because it needs an audience that wants to think.
A good example of this was in "Spits" a dutch free rag. X percentage of young people feel that Wilders (a controversial right-wing politician on a crusade against Islam) should be prosecuted. Small detail, the poll was run by FunX (a so-called multi-cultural station that does NOT broadcast Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Japanese, Korean, African music) and Maroc.nl (a site aimed at marrocan immigrants). Gosh, what an unbiased source... but the reprinted press-release did NOT mention the specific background of those who were polled making it instead appear that it was a an average sample.
Now a GOOD reporter would have asked about this because he WOULD have remembered other polls such as one reporting that Wilders has a lot of support among young people, especially of course white... So what is the truth? I don't know and the news ain't telling me.
It would be like polling americans opinion about Obama, by asking Fox viewers... lots of news but truth?
Good reporting is essential, because PR managers have become very skilled at twisting their press-releases to say what they want to say, even if the facts are completely different.
Such as the harm piracy does to media companies that just happen to increase their profits each year.
If you were to use Twitter, you would get the same quality information feed as a press-release (none) AND loose the ability to verify on top of that. How do you KNOW the person claiming X is actually the person he claims to be? Do you only accept a fact if a LOT of people repeat it? Oh goodie, then it is now a fact that you can't get pregnant if you were a virgin...
This experiment is to real news-gathering what the earlier article about that guy in his shed was to real astronomy. Sorry, those pictures might look pretty, but they are NOT scientifically useful anymore. And the news you get from Twitter might very fast and numerous, but it doesn't have the ability to dig deeper, to examine, to question, to investigate.
The odd thing is that a lot of people in Holland now can and do easily read THREE newspapers, (Spits, Metro, De Pers) but end up knowing less then if they read the rag "Telegraaf" (think Fox-news without the integrity) because even if it was shallow and biased, it at least sometimes digged down (to be fair, "De Pers" does try but still fails to ask the "killer question" that can so easily rip apart most press-releases).
I remember an old TV-journalist, (for the dutch, the bald guy who did the news magazine for Veronica) who could really tear apart the person he was questioning, taking what they said and ripping it to shreds to expose their lies and true motives... Jerremy Paxman used to be like this for the brits. Nowadays it news interviews seem close to talk shows on late-night. All about making the guest look good and carefully not touch on anything that might expose them.
To bad, the world needs good reporting. Less news, more digging.
If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment then you have to block all the teen boys who want to watch the world burn.
This system is only of use to cops to stop people trying to evade arrest. They are NOT going to use it to pull you over for a drink driving test, JUST as they do NOT puncture your tires with a nail-mat at this point in time.
But if it stops some idiot from speeding through a residential area not caring who he/she kills in their maddness, then I don't care if they MIGHT be killed when the police tries to stop them. In fact, I don't understand why they don't just shoot the drivers. The bleeding hearts have gone out of control.
So now we got to worry about a tool to stop criminals because it might kill them. Better recall police guns then, people could get hurt if you shoot them.
But the more realistic measures of getting your tires punctured or your car pushed off the road are no picnic either.
Still, it says a lot about the GP that he is glad his car can run from the cops. Mine has no need to. And if people think carjackers are going to use it... then you are to stupid to function. What would a carjacker want with a car that can't move anymore?
Which is roughly the only way to get my car to break any speed limit:)
Still I think it is all a bit silly. I can stop any car with just a pistol, that most cops carry already. 1 stop sign, after that, your rights to continue breathing are temporarily suspended.
And would the US want to pay the bill? With what exactly?
And it the US and other western nations that have bled Haiti dry with loans they want repaid. The west is a loanshark. Stop that practice and poor countries would be helped far more as they could actually spend any earned money on developing their country rather then paying of endless debts. haiti was going backrupt just paying the intrest on its loans alone, not even able to actually pay them off. A perputual money machine for the west.
Oh and since the US has homeless people, can it be overtaken as well for not being able to provide? Wonder who would want that job.
How does shooting people coming to help you solve the food shortage?
The problem is here that aid has become a way of life in parts of the world. Even this disaster relieve might only make the situation worse. Sure, we can rebuild their schools and hospitals while they sit back and make us feel good by helping them, but it makes a mess of the economy and makes people dependent on aid. Where is the money going to come from to maintain that very nice hospital? Where is the skill?
Think as a parent, do you let your kid mess up his homework and get an F or do you put the kid on the couch while you do the job perfect and the kid gets an A?
There is no easy answer. You can't just stand back while people die, but by taking over the entire country like this, you are creating a dependent society.
From what I seen is this a macro program that can use screenshots rather then key/mouse data to automate tasks. So you PROGRAM your PC in the same way you PROGRAM a VCR to record a show. It is NOT the same as writing an application.
But it seems very intresting once you got past this difference. Macro's are very handy for testing in my experience but often have a problem because a tiny mis-alignment can ruin it all. If this program is smarter because it can regonize where data is supposed to go... well that would certainly make automated tests a bit easier.
Interesting stuff. Just don't think you will be writing software with this.
It is becoming very hard to buy a true netbook. And that means an SSD because the last thing you want is a SLOW vulnerable HD with tons of space you are never going to use. Come on, my Acer ZG5 has 16GB SSD plus 2x 16GB SD. That is MORE then enough for several days worth of music and some entertainment. And I can always swap more and I don't have to be afraid to drop it while it is running and hear the HD rattle.
The netbook is NOT a cheap laptop.
I can however see a future for the wrist watch computer, if I would ever dare actually wear it. Imagine it being able to be straightened, then, if it is comfortable to wear, you suddenly got a space for a wide screen tablet device, that might even have a fold out flexibele keypad.
The idea is nice, but I don't think it will work because it will look fucking hideous on anything but a cute girl and also be FAR to vulnerable.
He only briefly mentions the Polar Express movie that had a really big uncanny valley problem.
If you have seen the movie, you know what it is, it looks at once so real and at the same time is a Bugs Bunny cartoon. The two just don't match.
There is a reason movies like Madagascar, Wall-E, Up etc despite being drop dead gorgous use clear cartoony looks ESPECIALLY for their characters. And while it is acceptable for the plane in Madagascar 2 to bounce like cartoon plane because it is clear that no matter how accurately it is rendered it is NOT a real aircraft. But the train in Polar Express DOES look real and real trains do not behave like that.
It is the superman problem. Spiderman can swing from wall to wall because it slightly makes sense, sense enough perhaps. Superman being able to lift an Island doesn't. Stopping a train. That has nothing to do with strength anymore, but with conversion of energy. He may be strong enough, but we know the ground isn't.
The uncanny valley is NOT something not looking right, but us knowing that the real thing looks or behaves different. It is why walking is SO hard to do in any animation. Most animation showing walking has a problem with slipping, it looks immidiatly wrong to us.
A robot, and no robot so far looks anything like a real human, just doesn't look real enough to trigger the feeling that it is wrong.
The uncanny valley is not restricted to animation or future robots. Ordinary humans got it as well, watch someone with a glass eye or scarring that is not obvious anymore but still large. Burn victim with a lot of corrective surgery whose face is close but at the same time a million miles removed. A burn victim with just a huge nasty scar might be shocking, but that is soon passed, but that face that is almost normal but isn't, that gets the constant stares.
The uncanny valley is not a theory or a measurement, it is simply the observation that people accept a:) as a face but a 99% realistic rendering is instantly picked as fake NOT for missing a pixel but because the eyes are at an unnatural angle.
I just don't get the logic of competition either, already posted elsewhere in this thread but MS competes with Apple on far more fronts, practically ALL of them. The only difference is that Apple sells desktop PC's and MS doesn't. But MS is coming out with a tablet, as is Apple, they both got mobile phones AND mp3 players, server OS...
I frankly didn't see this coming. Steve Jobs must really be asleep at the wheel.
So, Google launches a mobile phone and all of sudden that is the big enemy? The biggest competitor? Has Jobs gained his kidney in exchange for his brain?
Google vs Apple: mobile phone.
MS vs Apple: Mobile phone, OS, Browser, Office productivity, home movie making software, media codecs, media plugin for browser, music shop, MP3 player (iPod vs Zune), portable media player (iPod touch vs Zune HD), Tablet, server OS...
The list probably goes on, but anyone with a brain will notice the difference already in the list size.
Apple seems to be cutting of its head to spite its face. They don't want google to have iPhone search data... why? Because MS won't be using the data to promote their OWN smartphones AND everything else OVER Apples product.
Either Apple sees google blowing them out of the water in every other aspect as well (do they think Android/ChomeOS could wipe OSX of the map?) or they got VERY short memories. MS does NOT play well, they should know this, they been screwed before.
I predict that this will NOT work out well, don't know how it is going bite Apple in the ass, but if you seen as many butts with MS tooth prints in it, you know the signs.
I hear you saying that you think MS is a reformed thief. Fine, but where is your evidence? I seen them not change at all. People have been saying for over 10 years that MS has changed and it is never true.
I will presume next time your house is on fire, that it is just a crank call. Hope you make it out alone and can convince the insurance company you did call for help.
But you are also plain wrong, even now the rovers are doing science, and the experience learned from this will help better design the next mission. The cost of keeping this going is neglible, just the cost of sending a signal and a small staff, on the NASA's budget it is tiny. Oh we could also give the couple of million to the banks so they can give themselves even bigger bonusses, but some people would call that silly.
Apple has been EXTREMELY lucky with the iPod. Through it millions of people have become exposed NOT just to an Apple product but the idea that MS is NOT the end all of computers. Apple computer sales have soared thanks to the iPod effect and Apple is doing really really well at the moment.
The iPhone is "just" more of the same effect (and counting the iPod touch as the same). Showing people that far more then "just an MP3 player" can be not-windows.
Apple has gained HUGE sales because people are starting to accept that PC does NOT have to mean Windows... and then they are going to put Bing/MS on their own flagship products?
That would be like Shell putting a sticker on its F1 cars "runs on Exxon". McDonalds might as well advertise that chicken tastes better and flame grilled is the best for a burger.
The financial situation of the world is very understandable when you see the financial media produce this kind of shortsighted stuff.
Google and Apple compete on mobile phones, so Apple will run to MS, with which it competes on Operating System, productivity software, media codecs, MP3 players, browser oh and lets not forget MOBILE PHONES!
Surely Businessweek is aware MS is involved with mobile phones? I know they are not all that successful but surely someone in that office has heard of it?
So to screw google out of the data they get through search they give all that data to MS? That makes a LOT of sense.
Businessweek, read by the people that gave you the recession.
Recently I have been thinking about a new Star Trek series. To get back to the root, something between TOS and TNG.
But what would you do if you wanted a cross-over. Actors are expensive or dead. But you could create a CGI model of past actors, have them acted out by an impressionist and voila, continuety with no timeline problems.
And you could also finally make aliens that look really good without just slapping some plastic on their face. And you could have kids played by adults so you get rid of the horrible acting, wesley acted by an adult. All you need to do now is to hire better writers and you are done.
You could also get rid of the need to cast actors for their similar looks to historical actors. Anyone could play Churchill, they would only be selected on how well they can act not their looks.
Finally we could cast women in Sci-Fi who can act, not just by how far their nipples poke through their jumpsuit.
I can see plenty of future for this tech. Not so much to make a new Dirty Harry movie (Clint Eastwood couldn;t act it even with CGI, he is an old man and moves like an old man) but to seperate the looks of an actor from their talent to ACT. Mind you, a lot of current actors would be out of a job.
For gaming another advance needs to be made. Voice acting. Imagine what you could do if the voices in a game were computer generated. No more commander Sheppard. You could pick whatever name you want, without it needing to be pre-recorded.
Oh and for those who think it is a really bad idea, Doctor Who essentially made this a part of the story. Change the actor whenever you want because the character can continue, so what would be that different if the actor changed but the face stayed the same?
The free market, how does it stand with the US economy in tatters, the banks going on as if nothing has happened, 10% unemployment, a national debt that can never be paid off.
What is most amazing about your kind is that you never can admit that your system has been failing rather badly as well. Americans are like the british, still proud of their empire, long after it crumbled. Nero playing emperor while Rome burns.
He claims the news is erased from the MIND, not the internet (archives). He then backs up his claim by linking to past news stories that he says conflict with this one but apparently have been forgotten.
Sadly he does make another mistake, people may assume Bin Laden is death, but they have no evidence so they keep looking until they are 100% sure.
The real problem is lawsuits. If the school officials get it wrong (and lets face it school kids HAVE attacked their school in the past) then they are sued, so nobody plays it safe anymore.
One of the reason the US medical bill is through the roof is that because if a patient demands X procedure while the doctor knows it is silly, he gets it, because else he might sue.
Say you are a station attendant and see a bag that seems to have been left behind. In the "real" world, you take a look, the changes of it being a bomb are remote and even if it is, bombs rarely explode just by looking. BUT what if you can be sued if you get it wrong? Loose not just your life (and nobody thinks they are going to die) but every thing you own? (Silly? Count the doctors that smoke or drink or drive without a seatbelt but do have malpractice insurance.)
If you are sued for millions if you don't follow the book, you follow the book. And if you don't you loose your insurance and the first court case could bankrupt you.
Calling the people involved stupid is the easy lazy answer. The real problem is the sue happy culture of the US, where any slightest mistake anyone not following the rule book to the letter can be sued for millions. If I saw an American have a heart attack, I would let them die. I could be sued for breaking a rib while saving their lives. No thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
There are two sorts of news. One is the stuff you find in cheapo rags like "Metro" and the other free newspapers. Also when you read news.google.com, the reuters and associated press feeds.
This is the news of what people want you to hear. Press statements as it were.
But the second meaning of news, as in information, reporting, investigation, that you won't get. That is the author of an article using his/her experience and wisdom to question the information that was fed to him and dig deeper.
NEWS: RIAA claims piracy costs 1 gazillion dollars.
news: RIAA claims piracy costs more money then exists in the world and they do this while their members reported record profits just last week, how come?
The first is easy, there is always someone somewhere willing to put out a press release, the second is incredibly hard and expensive and has a limited market because it needs an audience that wants to think.
A good example of this was in "Spits" a dutch free rag. X percentage of young people feel that Wilders (a controversial right-wing politician on a crusade against Islam) should be prosecuted. Small detail, the poll was run by FunX (a so-called multi-cultural station that does NOT broadcast Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Japanese, Korean, African music) and Maroc.nl (a site aimed at marrocan immigrants). Gosh, what an unbiased source... but the reprinted press-release did NOT mention the specific background of those who were polled making it instead appear that it was a an average sample.
Now a GOOD reporter would have asked about this because he WOULD have remembered other polls such as one reporting that Wilders has a lot of support among young people, especially of course white... So what is the truth? I don't know and the news ain't telling me.
It would be like polling americans opinion about Obama, by asking Fox viewers... lots of news but truth?
Good reporting is essential, because PR managers have become very skilled at twisting their press-releases to say what they want to say, even if the facts are completely different.
Such as the harm piracy does to media companies that just happen to increase their profits each year.
If you were to use Twitter, you would get the same quality information feed as a press-release (none) AND loose the ability to verify on top of that. How do you KNOW the person claiming X is actually the person he claims to be? Do you only accept a fact if a LOT of people repeat it? Oh goodie, then it is now a fact that you can't get pregnant if you were a virgin...
This experiment is to real news-gathering what the earlier article about that guy in his shed was to real astronomy. Sorry, those pictures might look pretty, but they are NOT scientifically useful anymore. And the news you get from Twitter might very fast and numerous, but it doesn't have the ability to dig deeper, to examine, to question, to investigate.
The odd thing is that a lot of people in Holland now can and do easily read THREE newspapers, (Spits, Metro, De Pers) but end up knowing less then if they read the rag "Telegraaf" (think Fox-news without the integrity) because even if it was shallow and biased, it at least sometimes digged down (to be fair, "De Pers" does try but still fails to ask the "killer question" that can so easily rip apart most press-releases).
I remember an old TV-journalist, (for the dutch, the bald guy who did the news magazine for Veronica) who could really tear apart the person he was questioning, taking what they said and ripping it to shreds to expose their lies and true motives... Jerremy Paxman used to be like this for the brits. Nowadays it news interviews seem close to talk shows on late-night. All about making the guest look good and carefully not touch on anything that might expose them.
To bad, the world needs good reporting. Less news, more digging.
If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment then you have to block all the teen boys who want to watch the world burn.
This system is only of use to cops to stop people trying to evade arrest. They are NOT going to use it to pull you over for a drink driving test, JUST as they do NOT puncture your tires with a nail-mat at this point in time.
But if it stops some idiot from speeding through a residential area not caring who he/she kills in their maddness, then I don't care if they MIGHT be killed when the police tries to stop them. In fact, I don't understand why they don't just shoot the drivers. The bleeding hearts have gone out of control.
So now we got to worry about a tool to stop criminals because it might kill them. Better recall police guns then, people could get hurt if you shoot them.
But the more realistic measures of getting your tires punctured or your car pushed off the road are no picnic either.
Still, it says a lot about the GP that he is glad his car can run from the cops. Mine has no need to. And if people think carjackers are going to use it... then you are to stupid to function. What would a carjacker want with a car that can't move anymore?
Which is roughly the only way to get my car to break any speed limit :)
Still I think it is all a bit silly. I can stop any car with just a pistol, that most cops carry already. 1 stop sign, after that, your rights to continue breathing are temporarily suspended.
Then I would have found my new home :P
Don't count on it.
And would the US want to pay the bill? With what exactly?
And it the US and other western nations that have bled Haiti dry with loans they want repaid. The west is a loanshark. Stop that practice and poor countries would be helped far more as they could actually spend any earned money on developing their country rather then paying of endless debts. haiti was going backrupt just paying the intrest on its loans alone, not even able to actually pay them off. A perputual money machine for the west.
Oh and since the US has homeless people, can it be overtaken as well for not being able to provide? Wonder who would want that job.
How does shooting people coming to help you solve the food shortage?
The problem is here that aid has become a way of life in parts of the world. Even this disaster relieve might only make the situation worse. Sure, we can rebuild their schools and hospitals while they sit back and make us feel good by helping them, but it makes a mess of the economy and makes people dependent on aid. Where is the money going to come from to maintain that very nice hospital? Where is the skill?
Think as a parent, do you let your kid mess up his homework and get an F or do you put the kid on the couch while you do the job perfect and the kid gets an A?
There is no easy answer. You can't just stand back while people die, but by taking over the entire country like this, you are creating a dependent society.
From what I seen is this a macro program that can use screenshots rather then key/mouse data to automate tasks. So you PROGRAM your PC in the same way you PROGRAM a VCR to record a show. It is NOT the same as writing an application.
But it seems very intresting once you got past this difference. Macro's are very handy for testing in my experience but often have a problem because a tiny mis-alignment can ruin it all. If this program is smarter because it can regonize where data is supposed to go... well that would certainly make automated tests a bit easier.
Interesting stuff. Just don't think you will be writing software with this.
It is becoming very hard to buy a true netbook. And that means an SSD because the last thing you want is a SLOW vulnerable HD with tons of space you are never going to use. Come on, my Acer ZG5 has 16GB SSD plus 2x 16GB SD. That is MORE then enough for several days worth of music and some entertainment. And I can always swap more and I don't have to be afraid to drop it while it is running and hear the HD rattle.
The netbook is NOT a cheap laptop.
I can however see a future for the wrist watch computer, if I would ever dare actually wear it. Imagine it being able to be straightened, then, if it is comfortable to wear, you suddenly got a space for a wide screen tablet device, that might even have a fold out flexibele keypad.
The idea is nice, but I don't think it will work because it will look fucking hideous on anything but a cute girl and also be FAR to vulnerable.
He only briefly mentions the Polar Express movie that had a really big uncanny valley problem.
If you have seen the movie, you know what it is, it looks at once so real and at the same time is a Bugs Bunny cartoon. The two just don't match.
There is a reason movies like Madagascar, Wall-E, Up etc despite being drop dead gorgous use clear cartoony looks ESPECIALLY for their characters. And while it is acceptable for the plane in Madagascar 2 to bounce like cartoon plane because it is clear that no matter how accurately it is rendered it is NOT a real aircraft. But the train in Polar Express DOES look real and real trains do not behave like that.
It is the superman problem. Spiderman can swing from wall to wall because it slightly makes sense, sense enough perhaps. Superman being able to lift an Island doesn't. Stopping a train. That has nothing to do with strength anymore, but with conversion of energy. He may be strong enough, but we know the ground isn't.
The uncanny valley is NOT something not looking right, but us knowing that the real thing looks or behaves different. It is why walking is SO hard to do in any animation. Most animation showing walking has a problem with slipping, it looks immidiatly wrong to us.
A robot, and no robot so far looks anything like a real human, just doesn't look real enough to trigger the feeling that it is wrong.
The uncanny valley is not restricted to animation or future robots. Ordinary humans got it as well, watch someone with a glass eye or scarring that is not obvious anymore but still large. Burn victim with a lot of corrective surgery whose face is close but at the same time a million miles removed. A burn victim with just a huge nasty scar might be shocking, but that is soon passed, but that face that is almost normal but isn't, that gets the constant stares.
The uncanny valley is not a theory or a measurement, it is simply the observation that people accept a :) as a face but a 99% realistic rendering is instantly picked as fake NOT for missing a pixel but because the eyes are at an unnatural angle.
I just don't get the logic of competition either, already posted elsewhere in this thread but MS competes with Apple on far more fronts, practically ALL of them. The only difference is that Apple sells desktop PC's and MS doesn't. But MS is coming out with a tablet, as is Apple, they both got mobile phones AND mp3 players, server OS...
I just don't get it.
I frankly didn't see this coming. Steve Jobs must really be asleep at the wheel.
So, Google launches a mobile phone and all of sudden that is the big enemy? The biggest competitor? Has Jobs gained his kidney in exchange for his brain?
Google vs Apple: mobile phone.
MS vs Apple: Mobile phone, OS, Browser, Office productivity, home movie making software, media codecs, media plugin for browser, music shop, MP3 player (iPod vs Zune), portable media player (iPod touch vs Zune HD), Tablet, server OS...
The list probably goes on, but anyone with a brain will notice the difference already in the list size.
Apple seems to be cutting of its head to spite its face. They don't want google to have iPhone search data... why? Because MS won't be using the data to promote their OWN smartphones AND everything else OVER Apples product.
Either Apple sees google blowing them out of the water in every other aspect as well (do they think Android/ChomeOS could wipe OSX of the map?) or they got VERY short memories. MS does NOT play well, they should know this, they been screwed before.
I predict that this will NOT work out well, don't know how it is going bite Apple in the ass, but if you seen as many butts with MS tooth prints in it, you know the signs.
I hear you saying that you think MS is a reformed thief. Fine, but where is your evidence? I seen them not change at all. People have been saying for over 10 years that MS has changed and it is never true.
But fine, point me to some evidence.
Opera is on the Wii, DS and of course many a mobile phone whose own browser sucks, but often with a fake user_agent string.
I will presume next time your house is on fire, that it is just a crank call. Hope you make it out alone and can convince the insurance company you did call for help.
What a boring world you must life in.
But you are also plain wrong, even now the rovers are doing science, and the experience learned from this will help better design the next mission. The cost of keeping this going is neglible, just the cost of sending a signal and a small staff, on the NASA's budget it is tiny. Oh we could also give the couple of million to the banks so they can give themselves even bigger bonusses, but some people would call that silly.
No ways would the rovers have sex, they are related to each other... oh they were created in the south of the USA, never mind.
Apple has been EXTREMELY lucky with the iPod. Through it millions of people have become exposed NOT just to an Apple product but the idea that MS is NOT the end all of computers. Apple computer sales have soared thanks to the iPod effect and Apple is doing really really well at the moment.
The iPhone is "just" more of the same effect (and counting the iPod touch as the same). Showing people that far more then "just an MP3 player" can be not-windows.
Apple has gained HUGE sales because people are starting to accept that PC does NOT have to mean Windows... and then they are going to put Bing/MS on their own flagship products?
That would be like Shell putting a sticker on its F1 cars "runs on Exxon". McDonalds might as well advertise that chicken tastes better and flame grilled is the best for a burger.
The financial situation of the world is very understandable when you see the financial media produce this kind of shortsighted stuff.
Google and Apple compete on mobile phones, so Apple will run to MS, with which it competes on Operating System, productivity software, media codecs, MP3 players, browser oh and lets not forget MOBILE PHONES!
Surely Businessweek is aware MS is involved with mobile phones? I know they are not all that successful but surely someone in that office has heard of it?
So to screw google out of the data they get through search they give all that data to MS? That makes a LOT of sense.
Businessweek, read by the people that gave you the recession.
Recently I have been thinking about a new Star Trek series. To get back to the root, something between TOS and TNG.
But what would you do if you wanted a cross-over. Actors are expensive or dead. But you could create a CGI model of past actors, have them acted out by an impressionist and voila, continuety with no timeline problems.
And you could also finally make aliens that look really good without just slapping some plastic on their face. And you could have kids played by adults so you get rid of the horrible acting, wesley acted by an adult. All you need to do now is to hire better writers and you are done.
You could also get rid of the need to cast actors for their similar looks to historical actors. Anyone could play Churchill, they would only be selected on how well they can act not their looks.
Finally we could cast women in Sci-Fi who can act, not just by how far their nipples poke through their jumpsuit.
I can see plenty of future for this tech. Not so much to make a new Dirty Harry movie (Clint Eastwood couldn;t act it even with CGI, he is an old man and moves like an old man) but to seperate the looks of an actor from their talent to ACT. Mind you, a lot of current actors would be out of a job.
For gaming another advance needs to be made. Voice acting. Imagine what you could do if the voices in a game were computer generated. No more commander Sheppard. You could pick whatever name you want, without it needing to be pre-recorded.
Oh and for those who think it is a really bad idea, Doctor Who essentially made this a part of the story. Change the actor whenever you want because the character can continue, so what would be that different if the actor changed but the face stayed the same?
it has happened. And just the cost of defending myself could bankrupt me.
For copying it's legal moves.
The free market, how does it stand with the US economy in tatters, the banks going on as if nothing has happened, 10% unemployment, a national debt that can never be paid off.
What is most amazing about your kind is that you never can admit that your system has been failing rather badly as well. Americans are like the british, still proud of their empire, long after it crumbled. Nero playing emperor while Rome burns.
He claims the news is erased from the MIND, not the internet (archives). He then backs up his claim by linking to past news stories that he says conflict with this one but apparently have been forgotten.
Sadly he does make another mistake, people may assume Bin Laden is death, but they have no evidence so they keep looking until they are 100% sure.
The real problem is lawsuits. If the school officials get it wrong (and lets face it school kids HAVE attacked their school in the past) then they are sued, so nobody plays it safe anymore.
One of the reason the US medical bill is through the roof is that because if a patient demands X procedure while the doctor knows it is silly, he gets it, because else he might sue.
Say you are a station attendant and see a bag that seems to have been left behind. In the "real" world, you take a look, the changes of it being a bomb are remote and even if it is, bombs rarely explode just by looking. BUT what if you can be sued if you get it wrong? Loose not just your life (and nobody thinks they are going to die) but every thing you own? (Silly? Count the doctors that smoke or drink or drive without a seatbelt but do have malpractice insurance.)
If you are sued for millions if you don't follow the book, you follow the book. And if you don't you loose your insurance and the first court case could bankrupt you.
Calling the people involved stupid is the easy lazy answer. The real problem is the sue happy culture of the US, where any slightest mistake anyone not following the rule book to the letter can be sued for millions. If I saw an American have a heart attack, I would let them die. I could be sued for breaking a rib while saving their lives. No thanks.