*runs* You probably weren't expecting a serious reply but... yes, it does. Note that this isn't running some kind of virtual machine emulation -- it's running Linux binaries natively on the processor and doing some kind of magical remapping of kernel and library calls that, to be honest, I don't understand that well. More details in this article.
Not to sound sexist, but are you a woman? Few men would assume that all people have wanted a pony at some point in their lifes.;) No, but whenever someone asks me what I want (eg: as a Christmas gift) I'll sometimes say some items which I know are way beyond reasonable but I'll tack on "oh... and a pony!" at the end to emphasize I'm joking. And this year, I did in fact get a pony -- a nice, stuffed pink Frilly on a keychain. It's pinktacular.
So do you laugh at alcoholics who get cirrocis? Or smokers who get cancer? It's the same argument "they did something to get sick" so therefore they deserve nothing but contempt according to your argument. Yeah, I suppose I should have thought about what I wrote a little more carefully. There's a huge difference between people being hurt because of an illness, whether through their own fault or not, and a computer screwing up. The Darwin Awards show that many people do in fact laugh when someone gets injured because of their own stupidity... though I've yet to see a Dawin Award for someone getting cancer through their own fault. Apparently it's only funny when people die suddenly and spectacularly, not through many years of suffering.
For an example of slamming stupid users of other products, one need only check the Darwin Awards. And no, this isn't the case of a doctor laughing at someone because they have cancer -- what a ridiculous comparison. People get sick through no fault of their own, but when people screw up their computers, whether they meant to or not, it is their fault. The software design does play into this and I agree that software can be better designed to handle different kinds of users.
The author compares it to a vehicle where the brake/gas pedals switch on you. And if only software were so simple! Computers can do so many things and the software reflects that complexity... it's more like somebody who hasn't had any training sitting down in the cockpit of a 747 and trying to fly. You don't think actual trained pilots would laugh at the hilarity that ensued?
How about instead we place Sony and Apple in the same category?
Or just merge the two companies. You'd end up with Apony. And everyone, at some point in their lives, has wanted a pony.
Has anyone seen one of these? How do they compare to the top of the line LCD and Plasma screens? Is the picture hugely better, or are the main benefits in the power saving? I think the power savings is a side-effect. Check out this glowing review:
Contrast ratios were 10,000:1 for the prototype and they claim it'll be 100,000:1 in the production version. And at a supposed 1 ms response time. Even if the contrast claim is off by a factor of 5, it's still way more than any display on the market today.
Unfortunately, the image right beside it (a view of the phone from directly in front) does actually have the iPhone moniker above the keypad. That's the user uploaded image I mentioned. Compare the URLs.
Go to Google. Type in "maps". First link is Google. If they really are the "home page" for 80% of the people on the planet, then that's most definitely stifling competition. Go to Yahoo. Type in "maps". First link is Yahoo. Actually, it's rather interesting. For Google, the order is:
1. Google Maps 2. Mapquest 3. Yahoo Maps
For Yahoo, the order is:
1. Yahoo Maps 2. Mapquest 3. Google Maps
I don't know if that's a result of each search engine tooting their own horn, but at least you can't say that Google's map results are any more skewed than Yahoo's.
That it uses LGPL is more favorable for TinyMCE, but from a functionality standpoint what do you find better about it? I'm looking at implementing one of them for commercial use (as a hosted service) and would appreciate your thoughts on it.
First, if it was really OSX, why would they need Google's help to implement Google Maps? It's possible that the "Google helped with maps" line is more of a marketing move than any real technical requirement. It benefits Apple to say that Google backs their phone. It benefits Google to say that Apple chose them over any other map supplier. A good win/win even if it turns out to be a little white lie.
I wouldn't actually mind ml per km but why the arbitrary 100 multiplier thing? I'm guessing it's because it becomes a practical measurement to use. Most people know roughly how far 100km would take them (eg: about 5 trips to/from work) so it's easy to see how much fuel is required. Of course, any arbitrary unit would do. Maybe adopt a richter-style logarithmic scale for this... a Prius gets 1.2 on the fuel scale, while that Hummer gets a 6.7.
What ever happened to people learning to use their tools properly? I, for one, don't want training wheels on everything I use... languages included.
It's offensive to me that people actually advocate infantile languages just so the inexperienced won't mess themselves. How about education as a nice compromise? That's the way it should be. The tools should be high quality and written with security in mind. An insecure, infantile language with training wheels isn't a high quality language as it hinders a professional programmer and does no favors for the amateurs. If security is important, you wouldn't go out and buy the cheapest padlock you can find; you'd get one that is made by professionals who design for security. Why would languages be any different?
Wheelan notes that the Gini Coefficient (a measure of income inequality) for the U.S. has been moving away from countries like Japan and Sweden and closer to that of Brazil, where the murder rate is 5X that of NYC and crime is materially impacting GDP. So the bonus pay for a corporate executive somehow directly correlates with an increased crime rate?
Wow. If that's your actual, honest opinion, you scare me. It looks like "personal responsibility" is all but nostalgia for people. Having a failsafe airlock on the space shuttle doesn't cripple the functionality of the space shuttle. I suppose they could have made it unsafe and left it up to the astronauts' sense of personal responsibility to live with the consequences... but if safety doesn't impact overall functionality, why wouldn't you make your tools safe?
Saying that it's the programmers' fault for writing bad code is like saying being injured is the fault of a lumberjack for not knowing how to use a chainsaw which is dull and jerks a lot. It's much better to start with a tool that prevents such mishaps rather than being unsafe by default.
The weird thing is that I've seen your sig before, but I forgot about it when I wrote that post. Maybe you forgot because... you're already dead! [cue spooky theme music]
Also, I think the stamp analogy is quite apt. You could make the argument that someone is actively choosing to not collect stamps and, for some people, that might be correct. But for someone in a third world country where stamps do not exist and they have no knowledge of the word, it's hard to say that they're actively making a choice not to collect something they know nothing about. Not really, because as ultranova (717540) said below in (#17536480), very eloquently, the active and vocal atheists are making the case that "I refuse to collect stamps, and everyone who does collect stamps is either mad, stupid, or evil." I completely agree with the post you reference. However, if you take their statements to be some kind of fundamental truth about atheists in general, that's like saying a few loud and vocal cult leaders defines defines the fundamental truths about Christianity/Muslim/whatever.
Cute, but not exactly a logical statement. Religion is not a hobby, appeasing angry spirits and explaining away death, crop failure, the right to rule or whatever by means of gods is the ground state of humanity. The stance of refusing to believe is an active stance, and requires a conscious choice to believe in something you cannot prove (i.e. that there is no afterlife and that god will not get pissed if you eat meat on friday or don't wear your magical underwear). The statement could properly be applied to agnosticism, and maybe apathy. I haven't heard the phrase "ground state of humanity" -- what does that mean?
Also, I think the stamp analogy is quite apt. You could make the argument that someone is actively choosing to not collect stamps and, for some people, that might be correct. But for someone in a third world country where stamps do not exist and they have no knowledge of the word, it's hard to say that they're actively making a choice not to collect something they know nothing about.
Slashdot Mirror
..does it run linux?*runs* You probably weren't expecting a serious reply but... yes, it does. Note that this isn't running some kind of virtual machine emulation -- it's running Linux binaries natively on the processor and doing some kind of magical remapping of kernel and library calls that, to be honest, I don't understand that well. More details in this article.
For an example of slamming stupid users of other products, one need only check the Darwin Awards. And no, this isn't the case of a doctor laughing at someone because they have cancer -- what a ridiculous comparison. People get sick through no fault of their own, but when people screw up their computers, whether they meant to or not, it is their fault. The software design does play into this and I agree that software can be better designed to handle different kinds of users.
The author compares it to a vehicle where the brake/gas pedals switch on you. And if only software were so simple! Computers can do so many things and the software reflects that complexity... it's more like somebody who hasn't had any training sitting down in the cockpit of a 747 and trying to fly. You don't think actual trained pilots would laugh at the hilarity that ensued?
Or just merge the two companies. You'd end up with Apony. And everyone, at some point in their lives, has wanted a pony.
http://gear.ign.com/articles/679/679235p1.html
Contrast ratios were 10,000:1 for the prototype and they claim it'll be 100,000:1 in the production version. And at a supposed 1 ms response time. Even if the contrast claim is off by a factor of 5, it's still way more than any display on the market today.
Thanks... that's a much better presentation than the confusing version I wrote. :)
I think I've heard of him... we're talking about Justin Timbalank, right?
1. Google Maps
2. Mapquest
3. Yahoo Maps
For Yahoo, the order is:
1. Yahoo Maps
2. Mapquest
3. Google Maps
I don't know if that's a result of each search engine tooting their own horn, but at least you can't say that Google's map results are any more skewed than Yahoo's.
That it uses LGPL is more favorable for TinyMCE, but from a functionality standpoint what do you find better about it? I'm looking at implementing one of them for commercial use (as a hosted service) and would appreciate your thoughts on it.
Did you have to dupe your subject in the body of your comment as well? Slashdot has enough dupes as it is.
Here's the direct link to the iPhone on Amazon image:
r /A675KDVLCPUZV
2
http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-images/by-autho
This is a customer uploaded image uploaded by one "Ben Boyle" on December 18, 2006. The main product image has no such iPhone shown:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B000JI5L0
It's offensive to me that people actually advocate infantile languages just so the inexperienced won't mess themselves. How about education as a nice compromise? That's the way it should be. The tools should be high quality and written with security in mind. An insecure, infantile language with training wheels isn't a high quality language as it hinders a professional programmer and does no favors for the amateurs. If security is important, you wouldn't go out and buy the cheapest padlock you can find; you'd get one that is made by professionals who design for security. Why would languages be any different?
Is there a situation where you would be unable to use a stored procedure to accomplish the same tasks?
Saying that it's the programmers' fault for writing bad code is like saying being injured is the fault of a lumberjack for not knowing how to use a chainsaw which is dull and jerks a lot. It's much better to start with a tool that prevents such mishaps rather than being unsafe by default.
Also, I think the stamp analogy is quite apt. You could make the argument that someone is actively choosing to not collect stamps and, for some people, that might be correct. But for someone in a third world country where stamps do not exist and they have no knowledge of the word, it's hard to say that they're actively making a choice not to collect something they know nothing about.
Dammit, you'll ruin the joke.