But also this might lead to a future with encryption on remotes.
So, encryption is cool. It's obviously possible, as it is used in garage remotes and car lock remotes. But, those are also RF and nobody expects to have a universal version. I have several mac products, all in one room, so I've become really familiar with remote "pairing" but, I'm sure that wouldn't completely stop this kind of prank. But, somehow there must be a good in-between solution that will allow us Harmony remote users (it works with pairing on my apple tv) and the implementors of these techs to get along.
It would be nice to get everyone on the bluetooth remote line, with the security that offers. Let someone crack my 8 digit PIN to shut off my tv... what a colossal waste of time!
A white sapphire is an excellent alternative to a diamond. They are far prettier in settings, sparkle more and have more character. They are often mistaken for diamonds by people who actually like the appearance of stones (not by those who are stone critics).
They usually run far cheaper as well, a few hundred bucks for a couple carats if you're savvy.
The only downside is that they aren't quite as durable as a diamond (obviously).
I had 160kbps MP3 for 2 thousand songs in my early days of ripping my collection. Then one day I got the itch to reencode it all as 128kbps AAC. Not only did the quality improve significantly (the psychoacoustic field has come a long way since MP3) but the size of my library reduced significantly since it was originaly CBR, now VBR and 128kbps instead of 160kbps. So now it's 4 years later and still we're forced to use MP3 from service like amazon. This makes no sense to me at all. I challenge you to find a new media player that is both worth paying for and does not play AAC.
Why can't amazon sell everything in multiple formats, are they hard up for disk space? Let us choose between 256k MP3 and 256K AAC, and perhaps even 128k of both, all ripped individually from lossless sources.
I notice that nearly every post has the attitude about work that "you're on when you're on, and you're off when you're off." But, that's a fairly one-sided view of things. Personally, my work is my life. I grew up programming, it was my hobby, and now it's my job. But, it's still my hobby. So, when I hear something has gone wrong, hours after my usual shift is over, I am more than happy to get an email on my phone, and decide if it needs immediate attention.
Usually it doesn't. Frequently I can send a simple response such as "It sounds like it might be a bug, I'll look into it tomorrow" and everyone's happy. Occasionally I decide it's important and get to work on a fix immediately, or begin discussion on how to address it or whatever. It's all part of why I'm appreciated, and quite frankly, besides occasionally going to a show or whatever, what else am I doing? The diversion is actually welcome at times.
Too bad we'll never be able to do anything with this discovery. Pfft. I've already got a plan:
Step 1: Grab Helmet God.
Step 2: Upgrade it to stimulate the optimism center of the brain as well.
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!!! I tried this product at CES and I'm feeling very optimistic about its success.
But wouldn't the real solution be to train government employees in the arcane art of not installing P2P applications on government computers in the first place? Or does that just make too much sense to be effective? I'm sorry. You forgot to file form 23-B "Request for request to criticize" and amendment form 27-B-A2 "Amendment to criticism for system specific criticisms involving apes, lepers, or government employees," and submit it the resulting form along with a notarized copy of your mother's birth certificate request form, so I have the unfortunate duty to file a form to request the manual to instruct my assistant on how to file the request to have your bureaucrat grade demoted.
Remember to file the acceptance forms or risk a lengthy repeat of this entire process!
Well I can only hope this catches on.. the pavement. I really need to know what kind of traction this technology will provide. I don't know how I feel about 4,000 colors spinning around the corner as I speed down the pike, but, I'll accept it as long as it keeps me on the road.
Seriously. Bridgestone? I thought they made tires.
Frankly, software patents make zero sense whatsoever in any realm, ever. The only exception I can think of is if you are patenting from the most global scope in a very specific situation. For example, if you invented 100% original hardware and patented the software interfacing methods for that hardware. This wouldn't really be a software patent, but some might misconstrue it that way.
The reason that software patents are nonsense has nothing to do with virtues of rights, sharing, innovation or any of that great argument fodder. The real reason is that the entire set of possible software invention is dictated by the platforms on which the software is written. Even the absolute most amazingly creative code still has to live in the confines of someone's artificial world. This is the opposite of the normal invention/patent reality in the universal scope. Someone can invent something that nobody has ever heard of or thought of, and had not placed any rules on. That's someone who deserves the rights to their invention for a while.
Software, on the other hand, is ultimately a really complicated color by numbers affair. Eventually all algorithms become obvious because they are all necessary for everything else. A great example of this is the linked list someone attempted or possibly successfully patented a little while back (I didn't follow up). Linked lists are an obvious solution to a certain requirement in a system that doesn't do well under certain conditions. I purposefully write that "vaguely" because it is a sentence that applies to every appropriately used or designed algorithm in modern computing. We don't attempt to achieve perfect hashes and tune our hash maps accordingly because it's neat. It's required to deal with sparse data structures in a relatively simple way. Unless the hardware provided a more direct method to accomplish such tasks. And hence my point, since the hardware presents a limit set of actions, the software written upon was already dictated by the hardware design, and therefore is already obvious and prior art. The entire theoretically provable set of possible software operations is finite due to its limited universe also being finite.
To think of a very simplified version of the same situation, you can take a Tetris board with all the pieces you want to have, and you'll still have a finite set of possible layouts. It is due to the design of the game. Just like the finite nature of software is due to the design of our current computing platforms, which are all (beside a few architectural variances) pretty much exactly the same.
So, to repeat myself one last time:) Patenting software makes no sense because no software can every truly be original. When the computers were designed, the possible software was determined. This is why copyright actually makes more sense. The individual organization of code and the utilization of all of the methods and algorithms is more a composition like notes in a song than an original invention like the television or telephone, which I intentionally choose as examples of original things invented by multiple people simultaneously.
One could argue that the entire reality as humans know it would then dictate all possible inventions that might be considered patentable. This isn't proven, and until it is, I stand by my theory. Possible actions in a computer is finite, possible actions in the real live universe is... who knows? infinite maybe...
Not to mention you'll be able to use EVERY controller. It's on the official site. Nunchuck + WiiMote, Classic + WiiMote (just the usual required setup), Gamecube Controller, and WiiMote alone.
That's four configurations to choose from. Seriously awesome stuff here! Personally I don't think the article comments were written by someone who knows anything about Smash Bros. The serious smash player will probably find himself preferring the WiiMote alone, that's my prediction. Of all the setups it's the most determinate, which is what counts if you're into SSB for its technical aspects.
In the narrow view of this scenario you seem to have a point. But in the grand view of all invention you have completely lost your footing. If a simple swap of patent ownership was made, you'd be happy to see Vonage protected by these old patents that they supposedly infringe.
The real problem is the requirement to maintain a patent. Companies seem to require no active use and no context definition for a given patent. I think reform would solve the problem, if it could include certain division of patenting, such as, into particular markets for requiring patent claims to specify rather detailed scenarios of use. Then in 10 years, if some new company comes along and uses the same technology for entirely different purposes, or in a different market, then the patent wouldn't apply to them.
Furthermore, if a company is awarded in any way shape or form a kind of monopoly (such as cable companies or telephone companies awarded "natural" monopolies due to the practical realities of running cables and pipes) then they should forfeit any and all patent rights until said monopoly is relinquished. Perhaps there could be some context rules for that as well. Say, if AT&T has any natural monopolies to provided internet access then any patents used for the purpose of doing business over the internet should be forfeit in return for the huge gift of that monopoly.
These or other ideas come and go. It's too bad nobody really cares besides the minorities that actually understand and see the impact. The masses, the ones who actually vote, never hear of this and thusly, don't care. Because the voters don't care, the politicians don't bother to address it for their resumé a.k.a. platform, because it's simply bad marketing. Even if it was a great and intelligent move, too many potential voters would see it as not in their interests and not vote. This is why politicians do such strange things. They are motivated to keep their jobs. Wouldn't you be?
I always treated the character 007 more as a title than an actual person. The line of work is hazardous, and surely there was more than one, because the last guy took a bullet or forgot that the pen was poison and not antidote.
Hurrah, I'm not the only one! : )
It also explains why he never went up in rank no matter how many times he saved the queen/world. The inherited (on merit) identity of James Bond includes the number 007.
I had that thought... until I read the books.
As far as going up in rank, you do realize he's a Commander before he's a spy right? There is backstory, even in the movies it's presented, albeit in small bits strewn about randomly.
And besides, Bond is portrayed as essentially the coolest man alive. How could you rank higher than that?
When I bought my PS3 I had three interests: Blu-Ray, PS2 games, and PS1 games. I also liked the idea of a nicer DVD player for my large DVD collection. All of those things looked terribly on my projection screen with the hardware I currently had to watch or play it (PS2, and a Samsung upscaling DVD player), and the PS3 looked like a great all-in-one solution to this problem (which it is, it's wonderful).
Eventually I found several PS3 games that I really like, and some more are coming, but mainly I bought this system for backwards compatibility out of an HDMI port for my theatre system. That, and of course, HD Blu-Ray movies. So it's disheartening to see Sony dropping support for a huge library of games just to save a few bucks. On one hand, I understand what they are trying to do, but on the other hand, I can't imagine having purchased a PS3 without this facility.
I have to be honest though, at this point, nearly all of my "new game" playtime is on my Nintendo Wii and DS...
There is no valid technical reason for desiring closed platforms. There is a totally valid business concern, and it's not simply forcing customers into certain directions. I agree that this is an opportunity granted by a closed platform, but the real benefit for the business is significant reduction of variables to deal with when moving forward with fixes, new features, and so forth. Because Apple has taken the income over time, they are practically bound to add features. After the first two years or so, don't be surprised if the strict closed platform nature of the iPhone is relaxed significantly.
Also, for those bent on arguing the legality of such things, keep in mind that as a privately held network, AT&T has no requirements to allow devices access to its network if it doesn't want to. Currently, they allow zero devices without a contract or signed agreement of some kind, and in that contract they can easily apply device restrictions even if they seem ludicrous. Until this is actually challenged in a real court case (read: not class action fappery) then there is no reason to believe there are grounds to suggest the actions are unlawful. It's more practical to simply avoid the network entirely. Avoid the iPhone entirely.
Unless you have a significant Apple investment it's not the end-all be-all phone. The next generation of Nokias have as good of a browser (rendering-wise, it's based on the same KHTML engine) and have been open platforms for years. I use an iPhone because I have a strong library of media coming from iTMS, I don't really care about open platforms for my phone at this point. I did for a while, even developing for Symbian myself, but that time has come and gone.
However, if the situation was different, I don't even know why I would look at the iPhone. It's shiny sure, but it's not THAT amazing, the Nokia E90 is a lot cooler of a device imho. The iPhone's touch screen is ok, but hardly groundbreaking. Two touch senses at once... so? The pinching gesture gives me hand cramps, and even with all the smarts I still fat finger things all the time. With a keypad interface that's designed for interface and situation appropriate limits (i.e. single handed use in keypad mode of S60 phones) it's far faster and easier to navigate than a touchscreen. The learning curve is higher, yes, but that's not a problem, especially not for the target audiences.
So let us recognize the reality, and put your jealous tendencies aside for a moment. Realize that the iPhone, while technically interesting, is an embedded, developer unfriendly, locked down media device. It's not a portable computer, it's not a PDA. It's nothing more than exactly what it's advertised as being and that's what Apple intends. Why should we expect more from it? There are other companies offering what you want. Don't be so Apple obsessed.
Not enough. Few people have HDTVs, without which the blu-ray is pointless, and even people with HDTV are waiting and seeing which format wins before they plunk down hundreds of dollars for a new player.
Perhaps not entirely on topic but relevant none-the-less, I found myself with a PS3 after some certain temptations (and a cheaper price from being open-boxed) and naturally, had to give Blu-Ray a try.
I wasn't expecting much from the visuals really, simply because I lack a full HDTV (I have a 1024x768 res. projector that will downsample from 720p which looks pretty nice, with nice colors, but ultimately not much better resolution-wise). However, I do have a full surround system setup and my own little theatre in my living room essentially. So what I wasn't expecting to enjoy so much was the audio. The audio quality on most BR movies has improved so drastically over DVD that I actually will prefer BR over DVD despite the cost. Quite frankly, and I'm not sure if you've noticed this but, DVD audio quality is so horrible in many cases that you can't even hear the dialog of movies without turning the audio up ridiculously loud.
A friend of mine says the DVD audio quality comes from the need to fit more on a disc than there is space for. This friend works for a company that produces DVD's for major studios, so I trust them on this matter. The BR discs however, have more than enough space for all the video at 1080p plus uncompressed audio. Given this added space, there is no longer a need for compressing so much audio into such little space and no more need to sacrifice proper audio levels to give off a sense that surround sound is actually being used.
So to summarize, even though I don't have an HD output device, the immensely improved audio quality, offering for the first time ever in my home a believable theatre audio experience from existing, older surround hardware, is enough for me to pay up the extra money for BR discs and feel good about the feature adding to the cost of my PS3.
The answer is that Linux works great for doing what they are doing with it. It's a great little stable OS that can be configured for your needs and openly amended to work properly since it's OSS. However, the client-side of the Linux world is a nightmare to write for and support due to immense fragmentation. You would have to be a masochist and a poor businessman to try and support it directly.
Most of the Linux supporting commercial entities I've come across are either offering very very limited support (i.e. one specific distro) or they don't offer any support, just a build of their client and an "I hope this works for you" attitude.
I like when they do the latter, because at least you have something you can hack in yourself if necessary but it still isn't a real answer to the problem presented by the GNU/Linux ecosystem.
Apple releases the first software update for the new device through its Software Update control panel. Several hours later, it pulls the updater. A small number of people who applied the update experience crashes, data loss, headaches and ennui. The Apple support forums are filled with outraged posts. A day or so later, Apple releases a revised installer without comment, then quietly removes the angry posts from its support forums.
or possibly this one still:
A minor, rarely occurring flaw in the device begins to be discussed in the Apple support forums. Whiny, artistic types post lengthy diatribes about how this terrible design flaw has made the device unusable and scarred them emotionally. Electronic petitions are created demanding that Apple replace the devices for free, plus pay for counseling to help traumatized users overcome their emotional distress.
and just about to enter the former stage.
I'm amazed at how accurate this product cycle document is...
Also, I'm decidedly disappointed in the people who are complaining about this warning. First of all, it's nothing more than a warning so far. It is probably not going to amount to ANYTHING. Second, why shouldn't this warning be issued? The company is displaying that they are aware of what is being done with their product and reiterating that they don't support it and their actions could conflict with those of the hackers.
As for the armchair lawyers, why do you think you have any idea what you are talking about? These areas of law are gray, and extremely tenebrous unexplored areas, and the requirements on companies like Apple or AT&T are unknown. That's the point of trials. If this ends up with a trial behind it, regardless of the winner, it's a positive thing to clarify some laws for us with precedents. But, the important thing to remember is that you don't know what you're talking about. Neither do any of you, or you, or you. So please, stfu about the law aspect of this issue.
The naiveness displayed by all parties of this issue is blinding. You have the hackers making permanent changes to an embedded device. Apple haters claiming legal foul on an issue that hasn't even HAPPENED yet. The apologists blindly supporting the downsides of vendor lock-in. The armchair lawyers deciding for the courts before anyone has even offered a case.
Has anyone bothered to point out that this is the same issue you have in any other example of firmware hacks to accomplish device unlocking?
Has anyone bothered to realize that the DMCA exception protects you from legal action, AGAINST you, under copyright law, and nothing else? Why do so many people think this somehow implies responsibility on the side of the OEM?
Personally I'm happy to see Apple showing that they have the guts to continue on with their business model on the iPhone, without taking heed to the tech world underbelly who likes to have it both ways til Sunday. This is the only way we're going to continue to receive excellent software on mobile devices, which simply has not existed before the iPhone. These negative aspects of the iPhone model and release are exactly what we need to motivate other companies to create devices that may actually rival the iPhone and sell them by advertising that they aren't locking you in, that you can get SIM unlocked versions, etc.
Slashdot won't bring you any news or valid commentary but it sure as hell can generate massive amounts of speculative fiction for those who like to read that genre.
You read like one of those pointless Linux distro reviews that bases the whole thing on the install sequence, then offers a generic gnome screenshot, and somehow thinks there's anything even remotely useful in the article.
I'm afraid that for the majority of Linux users, there is nothing more to their experience than this, and maybe tooling around in cfg files for 25 hours before they are finished and have nothing left to do with their computer after setting it up. That's something of a norm for hobbyist OS's. The fun comes from the challenge of making it all work and once you've completed that, well, there is IRC for a while...
It took me some time to realize that was going on with my own Linux interests. And it's fine, but for real computer uses this isn't fun anymore. When it takes several hours of research and hacking to make any random new thing work, the OS isn't doing its job anymore. It's this aspect of Linux that made me pick OS X.
With those who stick with Linux, despite how many obviously and infuriatingly stupid design choices are made, with some of the most painfully conservative backers and developers, you get this response that it's somehow the solution for every problem. It's human nature, it seems, as programmers tend to do the same thing with the one or two languages they know.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.
When the only OS you accept is a disorganized mess, then every use for an OS is acceptably accomplished with immense hassle, religious indoctrination, and massive time consumption.
With this mode of thinking you can come to expect every positive point you make about another OS to receive baffling responses of "you can do that just as easily with..." Furthermore, don't even bother mentioning Windows doing a better job at anything, ever, unless you want to induce so much frothing at the mouth that the whole discussion fills with foam.
Of course, at this point you'll get all the beautifully pointless tautological arguments about how things are bad because they don't work on The One OS. How could you possible want to use anything besides Ogg since clearly that's the best choice as now that so many distributors of Linux have become fearful of patent issues, they will no longer distribute support for MP3. In fact, mp3 is clearly the worst choice because Ogg is the best choice because Linux is the best choice because RMS told you so.
Seriously, there is little or no basis in these arguments. That coupled with an intense fear of participating in the market to acquire anything, software, or media alike, results in some very bizarre "discussions" about what's good at what in the OS world.
And remember, this is an online discussion which means people are far less likely to yield to logical retorts. When these discussions happen in person, they tend to go more succinctly to the real issue at hand. After point and counterpoint for a while, anyone who I talk to about this issue "Why use OS X vs. Linux vs. Windows" always boils down to "It costs too much for mac hardware to use the OS." Yeah, there's a price barrier. Save your money folks, it's worth waiting a little longer. I cannot believe the blind resistance to paying for good software or hardware. I don't understand why these guys are so afraid to buy things. You would think they would value their time enough to pay a little cash to recuperate so much of their time. But, I guess that leads back to my first paragraph in this response, so I'll leave it at this.
Whenever the topic of mobile video comes up, my response is something akin to "who cares?"
Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes: about 5 or 6 Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes because I wanted a video: 1 (the rest were included with albums that I bought for the music) Number of videos I keep sync'ed to my iPod: 0 Number of videos I would keep sync'ed to my iPod if my iPod could play videos: 0
I want Firewire back, dammit.
I care.
Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons) Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes because I wanted a video: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons) Number of videos I keep sync'ed to my iPod: 5 Number of videos I would keep sync'ed to my iPod if my iPod could play videos: 5
And for the questions you ignored...
When I would actually watch videos on my iPod: Every day on the train; every time I find myself at the mall with the wife and she needs to try things on in the dressing room; Waiting in line for things like popular movies or concerts; miscellaneous situations not worth listing
Just because your life doesn't seem to convey a use of this doesn't mean others don't, and the fact that you're posting on/. is a good indicator that you aren't the target market. I used to be not the target market, but things have changed in the last few years as I finally adopted technology into my life as a way to make it more enjoyable, instead of something to hack and gripe about all the time. Considering the fact that my iPod is my iPhone, the chances of having my videos with me in a random moment of boredom are high enough to motivate me to use this method for watching my usual shows. I had to pick up the wife from the train one day, and while I was on time, she missed the train and that left me waiting for 35 minutes with nothing to do. Booyah, one episode of The Daily Show and one of Aqua Teen Hunger Force and the time had flown right by.
Another consideration is how much cheaper it is for me to buy my shows on iTMS or DVD than to pay a subscription fee to a cable carrier every single month. I rip my own DVD's with Handbrake, and with a few clever playlists I have everything I want to watch synced to my Apple TV magically, including extra stuff when I'm in the mood for "reruns" and a few video podcasts that give me highly casual viewing choices. A subset of this is what I sync to my iPhone. So when I am caught up waiting and watch a show on my iPod, I come home and sync the iPod, the Apple TV is automatically updated in reponse to that sync, so both the iPhone and iPod are updated with the next episode(s) of the show I want to watch. Magical. It's this convenience and ubiquity without the downsides of attempting to stream over our increasingly unreliable Internet that further draws me to this distribution methodology.
And despite having firewire ports on every computer, my experiences with firewire over time are that the implementations of nearly every firewire device are terrible. I had an external drive with both USB 2.0 and Firewire (DVD±RW drive) and it would fail burns on firewire but never on USB 2.0, regardless of which computer was in use. Then an external HDD that would constantly end up with corruption with Firewire usage but never with USB 2.0, and the list goes on. Firewire is an interesting idea and it's nice to have the option, but I hardly think it matters for something like an iPod. It doesn't help than almost no firewire devices have an additional port to support daisy chaining like they ALL SHOULD.
On top of this, I don't understand the complaint. If you're using an iPod, and you are using iTunes then you're probably not copying the entire contents of the device over very frequently. If you aren't using iTunes, then you're doing it wrong. It's great that people have hacked up softwar
It will replace ethernet in homes and casual settings, which 802.11b/g/a/n already has in many cases. But now, even geeks have a harder decision to make. When 802.11n on Apples rev 1 "n" supporting router gets 90mbps real throughput in ideal situations, you've lost your argument of speed for 100mbps wired networks. And what about 1000mbps wired networks? Surely they are affordable by now.
The other thought is, 802.11n will never replace Ethernet if it doesn't stop interfering with my wireless devices while under heavy load! Whenever I'm transferring a large file over 802.11n, my bluetooth mouse goes all wonky and slows to a crawl due to interference. Someday I will be able to use 5ghz mode, but until every device supports either a or n, which isn't going to happen to my consoles or my portable devices anytime soon, it will remain an issue.
This is the most honest move Microsoft has made in 20 years.
People will never choose a competitor when they can have the defacto standard choice for free. Now they will have a far worse time than difficulty obtaining updates when they pirate a copy of Windows. Once people want something better than WinXP, they will look at other choices (unless MS also lowers the price of Vista significantly.)
Even if Vista gets cheap, it's still going to be a case of shopping, which is something most people simply never do when it comes to an OS. So I can't see how this is a bad thing. Sure, M$ may make a mistake here and there but that's something everyone does, and it's something they will fix for you with a phone call.
You should be happy for any increase in attention the masses may give to Linux or Apple, depending on your religious preference. And regardless, you should be happy that the reigning king of OS distribution is playing a little more fair by enforcing the value of their product in both directions.
Slashdot Mirror
So, encryption is cool. It's obviously possible, as it is used in garage remotes and car lock remotes. But, those are also RF and nobody expects to have a universal version. I have several mac products, all in one room, so I've become really familiar with remote "pairing" but, I'm sure that wouldn't completely stop this kind of prank. But, somehow there must be a good in-between solution that will allow us Harmony remote users (it works with pairing on my apple tv) and the implementors of these techs to get along.
It would be nice to get everyone on the bluetooth remote line, with the security that offers. Let someone crack my 8 digit PIN to shut off my tv... what a colossal waste of time!
For the sake of the GP's sanity, I hope not.
It's not a tumah!
A white sapphire is an excellent alternative to a diamond. They are far prettier in settings, sparkle more and have more character. They are often mistaken for diamonds by people who actually like the appearance of stones (not by those who are stone critics).
They usually run far cheaper as well, a few hundred bucks for a couple carats if you're savvy.
The only downside is that they aren't quite as durable as a diamond (obviously).
I had 160kbps MP3 for 2 thousand songs in my early days of ripping my collection. Then one day I got the itch to reencode it all as 128kbps AAC. Not only did the quality improve significantly (the psychoacoustic field has come a long way since MP3) but the size of my library reduced significantly since it was originaly CBR, now VBR and 128kbps instead of 160kbps. So now it's 4 years later and still we're forced to use MP3 from service like amazon. This makes no sense to me at all. I challenge you to find a new media player that is both worth paying for and does not play AAC.
Why can't amazon sell everything in multiple formats, are they hard up for disk space? Let us choose between 256k MP3 and 256K AAC, and perhaps even 128k of both, all ripped individually from lossless sources.
I notice that nearly every post has the attitude about work that "you're on when you're on, and you're off when you're off." But, that's a fairly one-sided view of things. Personally, my work is my life. I grew up programming, it was my hobby, and now it's my job. But, it's still my hobby. So, when I hear something has gone wrong, hours after my usual shift is over, I am more than happy to get an email on my phone, and decide if it needs immediate attention.
Usually it doesn't. Frequently I can send a simple response such as "It sounds like it might be a bug, I'll look into it tomorrow" and everyone's happy. Occasionally I decide it's important and get to work on a fix immediately, or begin discussion on how to address it or whatever. It's all part of why I'm appreciated, and quite frankly, besides occasionally going to a show or whatever, what else am I doing? The diversion is actually welcome at times.
I'll simply get my HERF gun and this time things will not end badly!
(If you think this is OT, you need to read more Doctorow)Step 1: Grab Helmet God.
Step 2: Upgrade it to stimulate the optimism center of the brain as well.
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!!! I tried this product at CES and I'm feeling very optimistic about its success.
Remember to file the acceptance forms or risk a lengthy repeat of this entire process!
Stamp stamp stamp stamp stamp
Well I can only hope this catches on.. the pavement. I really need to know what kind of traction this technology will provide. I don't know how I feel about 4,000 colors spinning around the corner as I speed down the pike, but, I'll accept it as long as it keeps me on the road.
Seriously. Bridgestone? I thought they made tires.
Your whitewalls will advertise for Coca-Cola.
Frankly, software patents make zero sense whatsoever in any realm, ever. The only exception I can think of is if you are patenting from the most global scope in a very specific situation. For example, if you invented 100% original hardware and patented the software interfacing methods for that hardware. This wouldn't really be a software patent, but some might misconstrue it that way.
:) Patenting software makes no sense because no software can every truly be original. When the computers were designed, the possible software was determined. This is why copyright actually makes more sense. The individual organization of code and the utilization of all of the methods and algorithms is more a composition like notes in a song than an original invention like the television or telephone, which I intentionally choose as examples of original things invented by multiple people simultaneously.
The reason that software patents are nonsense has nothing to do with virtues of rights, sharing, innovation or any of that great argument fodder. The real reason is that the entire set of possible software invention is dictated by the platforms on which the software is written. Even the absolute most amazingly creative code still has to live in the confines of someone's artificial world. This is the opposite of the normal invention/patent reality in the universal scope. Someone can invent something that nobody has ever heard of or thought of, and had not placed any rules on. That's someone who deserves the rights to their invention for a while.
Software, on the other hand, is ultimately a really complicated color by numbers affair. Eventually all algorithms become obvious because they are all necessary for everything else. A great example of this is the linked list someone attempted or possibly successfully patented a little while back (I didn't follow up). Linked lists are an obvious solution to a certain requirement in a system that doesn't do well under certain conditions. I purposefully write that "vaguely" because it is a sentence that applies to every appropriately used or designed algorithm in modern computing. We don't attempt to achieve perfect hashes and tune our hash maps accordingly because it's neat. It's required to deal with sparse data structures in a relatively simple way. Unless the hardware provided a more direct method to accomplish such tasks. And hence my point, since the hardware presents a limit set of actions, the software written upon was already dictated by the hardware design, and therefore is already obvious and prior art. The entire theoretically provable set of possible software operations is finite due to its limited universe also being finite.
To think of a very simplified version of the same situation, you can take a Tetris board with all the pieces you want to have, and you'll still have a finite set of possible layouts. It is due to the design of the game. Just like the finite nature of software is due to the design of our current computing platforms, which are all (beside a few architectural variances) pretty much exactly the same.
So, to repeat myself one last time
One could argue that the entire reality as humans know it would then dictate all possible inventions that might be considered patentable. This isn't proven, and until it is, I stand by my theory. Possible actions in a computer is finite, possible actions in the real live universe is... who knows? infinite maybe...
Not to mention you'll be able to use EVERY controller. It's on the official site. Nunchuck + WiiMote, Classic + WiiMote (just the usual required setup), Gamecube Controller, and WiiMote alone.
That's four configurations to choose from. Seriously awesome stuff here! Personally I don't think the article comments were written by someone who knows anything about Smash Bros. The serious smash player will probably find himself preferring the WiiMote alone, that's my prediction. Of all the setups it's the most determinate, which is what counts if you're into SSB for its technical aspects.
In the narrow view of this scenario you seem to have a point. But in the grand view of all invention you have completely lost your footing. If a simple swap of patent ownership was made, you'd be happy to see Vonage protected by these old patents that they supposedly infringe.
The real problem is the requirement to maintain a patent. Companies seem to require no active use and no context definition for a given patent. I think reform would solve the problem, if it could include certain division of patenting, such as, into particular markets for requiring patent claims to specify rather detailed scenarios of use. Then in 10 years, if some new company comes along and uses the same technology for entirely different purposes, or in a different market, then the patent wouldn't apply to them.
Furthermore, if a company is awarded in any way shape or form a kind of monopoly (such as cable companies or telephone companies awarded "natural" monopolies due to the practical realities of running cables and pipes) then they should forfeit any and all patent rights until said monopoly is relinquished. Perhaps there could be some context rules for that as well. Say, if AT&T has any natural monopolies to provided internet access then any patents used for the purpose of doing business over the internet should be forfeit in return for the huge gift of that monopoly.
These or other ideas come and go. It's too bad nobody really cares besides the minorities that actually understand and see the impact. The masses, the ones who actually vote, never hear of this and thusly, don't care. Because the voters don't care, the politicians don't bother to address it for their resumé a.k.a. platform, because it's simply bad marketing. Even if it was a great and intelligent move, too many potential voters would see it as not in their interests and not vote. This is why politicians do such strange things. They are motivated to keep their jobs. Wouldn't you be?
Did you just reuse the download link? It's not like they are so dumb that they tracked downloads from links instead of purchases...
And if you purchased it twice, even for 0 pounds sterling you still had to pay SOME money for the download fee...
I had that thought... until I read the books.
As far as going up in rank, you do realize he's a Commander before he's a spy right? There is backstory, even in the movies it's presented, albeit in small bits strewn about randomly.
And besides, Bond is portrayed as essentially the coolest man alive. How could you rank higher than that?
When I bought my PS3 I had three interests: Blu-Ray, PS2 games, and PS1 games. I also liked the idea of a nicer DVD player for my large DVD collection. All of those things looked terribly on my projection screen with the hardware I currently had to watch or play it (PS2, and a Samsung upscaling DVD player), and the PS3 looked like a great all-in-one solution to this problem (which it is, it's wonderful).
Eventually I found several PS3 games that I really like, and some more are coming, but mainly I bought this system for backwards compatibility out of an HDMI port for my theatre system. That, and of course, HD Blu-Ray movies. So it's disheartening to see Sony dropping support for a huge library of games just to save a few bucks. On one hand, I understand what they are trying to do, but on the other hand, I can't imagine having purchased a PS3 without this facility.
I have to be honest though, at this point, nearly all of my "new game" playtime is on my Nintendo Wii and DS...
This is an understandable mistake, but, the real issue is Jessica Albabot's acting unit firmware, and THAT will be updated as well.
There is no valid technical reason for desiring closed platforms. There is a totally valid business concern, and it's not simply forcing customers into certain directions. I agree that this is an opportunity granted by a closed platform, but the real benefit for the business is significant reduction of variables to deal with when moving forward with fixes, new features, and so forth. Because Apple has taken the income over time, they are practically bound to add features. After the first two years or so, don't be surprised if the strict closed platform nature of the iPhone is relaxed significantly.
Also, for those bent on arguing the legality of such things, keep in mind that as a privately held network, AT&T has no requirements to allow devices access to its network if it doesn't want to. Currently, they allow zero devices without a contract or signed agreement of some kind, and in that contract they can easily apply device restrictions even if they seem ludicrous. Until this is actually challenged in a real court case (read: not class action fappery) then there is no reason to believe there are grounds to suggest the actions are unlawful. It's more practical to simply avoid the network entirely. Avoid the iPhone entirely.
Unless you have a significant Apple investment it's not the end-all be-all phone. The next generation of Nokias have as good of a browser (rendering-wise, it's based on the same KHTML engine) and have been open platforms for years. I use an iPhone because I have a strong library of media coming from iTMS, I don't really care about open platforms for my phone at this point. I did for a while, even developing for Symbian myself, but that time has come and gone.
However, if the situation was different, I don't even know why I would look at the iPhone. It's shiny sure, but it's not THAT amazing, the Nokia E90 is a lot cooler of a device imho. The iPhone's touch screen is ok, but hardly groundbreaking. Two touch senses at once... so? The pinching gesture gives me hand cramps, and even with all the smarts I still fat finger things all the time. With a keypad interface that's designed for interface and situation appropriate limits (i.e. single handed use in keypad mode of S60 phones) it's far faster and easier to navigate than a touchscreen. The learning curve is higher, yes, but that's not a problem, especially not for the target audiences.
So let us recognize the reality, and put your jealous tendencies aside for a moment. Realize that the iPhone, while technically interesting, is an embedded, developer unfriendly, locked down media device. It's not a portable computer, it's not a PDA. It's nothing more than exactly what it's advertised as being and that's what Apple intends. Why should we expect more from it? There are other companies offering what you want. Don't be so Apple obsessed.
Perhaps not entirely on topic but relevant none-the-less, I found myself with a PS3 after some certain temptations (and a cheaper price from being open-boxed) and naturally, had to give Blu-Ray a try.
I wasn't expecting much from the visuals really, simply because I lack a full HDTV (I have a 1024x768 res. projector that will downsample from 720p which looks pretty nice, with nice colors, but ultimately not much better resolution-wise). However, I do have a full surround system setup and my own little theatre in my living room essentially. So what I wasn't expecting to enjoy so much was the audio. The audio quality on most BR movies has improved so drastically over DVD that I actually will prefer BR over DVD despite the cost. Quite frankly, and I'm not sure if you've noticed this but, DVD audio quality is so horrible in many cases that you can't even hear the dialog of movies without turning the audio up ridiculously loud.
A friend of mine says the DVD audio quality comes from the need to fit more on a disc than there is space for. This friend works for a company that produces DVD's for major studios, so I trust them on this matter. The BR discs however, have more than enough space for all the video at 1080p plus uncompressed audio. Given this added space, there is no longer a need for compressing so much audio into such little space and no more need to sacrifice proper audio levels to give off a sense that surround sound is actually being used.
So to summarize, even though I don't have an HD output device, the immensely improved audio quality, offering for the first time ever in my home a believable theatre audio experience from existing, older surround hardware, is enough for me to pay up the extra money for BR discs and feel good about the feature adding to the cost of my PS3.
The answer is that Linux works great for doing what they are doing with it. It's a great little stable OS that can be configured for your needs and openly amended to work properly since it's OSS. However, the client-side of the Linux world is a nightmare to write for and support due to immense fragmentation. You would have to be a masochist and a poor businessman to try and support it directly.
Most of the Linux supporting commercial entities I've come across are either offering very very limited support (i.e. one specific distro) or they don't offer any support, just a build of their client and an "I hope this works for you" attitude.
I like when they do the latter, because at least you have something you can hack in yourself if necessary but it still isn't a real answer to the problem presented by the GNU/Linux ecosystem.
I think we are in this stage:
or possibly this one still:
and just about to enter the former stage.
I'm amazed at how accurate this product cycle document is...
Also, I'm decidedly disappointed in the people who are complaining about this warning. First of all, it's nothing more than a warning so far. It is probably not going to amount to ANYTHING. Second, why shouldn't this warning be issued? The company is displaying that they are aware of what is being done with their product and reiterating that they don't support it and their actions could conflict with those of the hackers.
As for the armchair lawyers, why do you think you have any idea what you are talking about? These areas of law are gray, and extremely tenebrous unexplored areas, and the requirements on companies like Apple or AT&T are unknown. That's the point of trials. If this ends up with a trial behind it, regardless of the winner, it's a positive thing to clarify some laws for us with precedents. But, the important thing to remember is that you don't know what you're talking about. Neither do any of you, or you, or you. So please, stfu about the law aspect of this issue.
The naiveness displayed by all parties of this issue is blinding. You have the hackers making permanent changes to an embedded device. Apple haters claiming legal foul on an issue that hasn't even HAPPENED yet. The apologists blindly supporting the downsides of vendor lock-in. The armchair lawyers deciding for the courts before anyone has even offered a case.
Has anyone bothered to point out that this is the same issue you have in any other example of firmware hacks to accomplish device unlocking?
Has anyone bothered to realize that the DMCA exception protects you from legal action, AGAINST you, under copyright law, and nothing else? Why do so many people think this somehow implies responsibility on the side of the OEM?
Personally I'm happy to see Apple showing that they have the guts to continue on with their business model on the iPhone, without taking heed to the tech world underbelly who likes to have it both ways til Sunday. This is the only way we're going to continue to receive excellent software on mobile devices, which simply has not existed before the iPhone. These negative aspects of the iPhone model and release are exactly what we need to motivate other companies to create devices that may actually rival the iPhone and sell them by advertising that they aren't locking you in, that you can get SIM unlocked versions, etc.
Slashdot won't bring you any news or valid commentary but it sure as hell can generate massive amounts of speculative fiction for those who like to read that genre.
I'm afraid that for the majority of Linux users, there is nothing more to their experience than this, and maybe tooling around in cfg files for 25 hours before they are finished and have nothing left to do with their computer after setting it up. That's something of a norm for hobbyist OS's. The fun comes from the challenge of making it all work and once you've completed that, well, there is IRC for a while...
It took me some time to realize that was going on with my own Linux interests. And it's fine, but for real computer uses this isn't fun anymore. When it takes several hours of research and hacking to make any random new thing work, the OS isn't doing its job anymore. It's this aspect of Linux that made me pick OS X.
With those who stick with Linux, despite how many obviously and infuriatingly stupid design choices are made, with some of the most painfully conservative backers and developers, you get this response that it's somehow the solution for every problem. It's human nature, it seems, as programmers tend to do the same thing with the one or two languages they know.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.
When the only OS you accept is a disorganized mess, then every use for an OS is acceptably accomplished with immense hassle, religious indoctrination, and massive time consumption.
With this mode of thinking you can come to expect every positive point you make about another OS to receive baffling responses of "you can do that just as easily with..." Furthermore, don't even bother mentioning Windows doing a better job at anything, ever, unless you want to induce so much frothing at the mouth that the whole discussion fills with foam.
Of course, at this point you'll get all the beautifully pointless tautological arguments about how things are bad because they don't work on The One OS. How could you possible want to use anything besides Ogg since clearly that's the best choice as now that so many distributors of Linux have become fearful of patent issues, they will no longer distribute support for MP3. In fact, mp3 is clearly the worst choice because Ogg is the best choice because Linux is the best choice because RMS told you so.
Seriously, there is little or no basis in these arguments. That coupled with an intense fear of participating in the market to acquire anything, software, or media alike, results in some very bizarre "discussions" about what's good at what in the OS world.
And remember, this is an online discussion which means people are far less likely to yield to logical retorts. When these discussions happen in person, they tend to go more succinctly to the real issue at hand. After point and counterpoint for a while, anyone who I talk to about this issue "Why use OS X vs. Linux vs. Windows" always boils down to "It costs too much for mac hardware to use the OS." Yeah, there's a price barrier. Save your money folks, it's worth waiting a little longer. I cannot believe the blind resistance to paying for good software or hardware. I don't understand why these guys are so afraid to buy things. You would think they would value their time enough to pay a little cash to recuperate so much of their time. But, I guess that leads back to my first paragraph in this response, so I'll leave it at this.
I care.
/. is a good indicator that you aren't the target market. I used to be not the target market, but things have changed in the last few years as I finally adopted technology into my life as a way to make it more enjoyable, instead of something to hack and gripe about all the time. Considering the fact that my iPod is my iPhone, the chances of having my videos with me in a random moment of boredom are high enough to motivate me to use this method for watching my usual shows. I had to pick up the wife from the train one day, and while I was on time, she missed the train and that left me waiting for 35 minutes with nothing to do. Booyah, one episode of The Daily Show and one of Aqua Teen Hunger Force and the time had flown right by.
Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons)
Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes because I wanted a video: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons)
Number of videos I keep sync'ed to my iPod: 5
Number of videos I would keep sync'ed to my iPod if my iPod could play videos: 5
And for the questions you ignored...
When I would actually watch videos on my iPod: Every day on the train; every time I find myself at the mall with the wife and she needs to try things on in the dressing room; Waiting in line for things like popular movies or concerts; miscellaneous situations not worth listing
Just because your life doesn't seem to convey a use of this doesn't mean others don't, and the fact that you're posting on
Another consideration is how much cheaper it is for me to buy my shows on iTMS or DVD than to pay a subscription fee to a cable carrier every single month. I rip my own DVD's with Handbrake, and with a few clever playlists I have everything I want to watch synced to my Apple TV magically, including extra stuff when I'm in the mood for "reruns" and a few video podcasts that give me highly casual viewing choices. A subset of this is what I sync to my iPhone. So when I am caught up waiting and watch a show on my iPod, I come home and sync the iPod, the Apple TV is automatically updated in reponse to that sync, so both the iPhone and iPod are updated with the next episode(s) of the show I want to watch. Magical. It's this convenience and ubiquity without the downsides of attempting to stream over our increasingly unreliable Internet that further draws me to this distribution methodology.
And despite having firewire ports on every computer, my experiences with firewire over time are that the implementations of nearly every firewire device are terrible. I had an external drive with both USB 2.0 and Firewire (DVD±RW drive) and it would fail burns on firewire but never on USB 2.0, regardless of which computer was in use. Then an external HDD that would constantly end up with corruption with Firewire usage but never with USB 2.0, and the list goes on. Firewire is an interesting idea and it's nice to have the option, but I hardly think it matters for something like an iPod. It doesn't help than almost no firewire devices have an additional port to support daisy chaining like they ALL SHOULD.
On top of this, I don't understand the complaint. If you're using an iPod, and you are using iTunes then you're probably not copying the entire contents of the device over very frequently. If you aren't using iTunes, then you're doing it wrong. It's great that people have hacked up softwar
It will replace ethernet in homes and casual settings, which 802.11b/g/a/n already has in many cases. But now, even geeks have a harder decision to make. When 802.11n on Apples rev 1 "n" supporting router gets 90mbps real throughput in ideal situations, you've lost your argument of speed for 100mbps wired networks. And what about 1000mbps wired networks? Surely they are affordable by now.
The other thought is, 802.11n will never replace Ethernet if it doesn't stop interfering with my wireless devices while under heavy load! Whenever I'm transferring a large file over 802.11n, my bluetooth mouse goes all wonky and slows to a crawl due to interference. Someday I will be able to use 5ghz mode, but until every device supports either a or n, which isn't going to happen to my consoles or my portable devices anytime soon, it will remain an issue.
This is the most honest move Microsoft has made in 20 years.
People will never choose a competitor when they can have the defacto standard choice for free. Now they will have a far worse time than difficulty obtaining updates when they pirate a copy of Windows. Once people want something better than WinXP, they will look at other choices (unless MS also lowers the price of Vista significantly.)
Even if Vista gets cheap, it's still going to be a case of shopping, which is something most people simply never do when it comes to an OS. So I can't see how this is a bad thing. Sure, M$ may make a mistake here and there but that's something everyone does, and it's something they will fix for you with a phone call.
You should be happy for any increase in attention the masses may give to Linux or Apple, depending on your religious preference. And regardless, you should be happy that the reigning king of OS distribution is playing a little more fair by enforcing the value of their product in both directions.