You didn't quite balance the equation okay either, it's 2H2 + O2 --> 2H2O. 8-)
Also, you are still using a combustion, which has efficiencies limited by a thermodynamic Carnot cycle. If you took the hydrogen and pumped it into a FUEL CELL, the reaction is far more effective (theoratical limit is actually a 100%) Fuel cells are already in use for power generation, notable example is the space shuttle.
And, yes, abstracting the power source can mean more cleaner power generation methods (such as wind, tidal, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc).
I thought that the PSX (dunno about PSX2) controller protocals are fairly well reversed engineered. Why not just jury rig something to either:
A: Capture the codes for analysis, ie, sniffing the PSX controller traffic, and
B: Using a PC to play back the signals?
The PSX2 takes regular PSX controllers if I remember correctly.
I imagine that the "40%" rate is because someone isn't entering the code properly. I don't imagine that the console designer included the debug code that would only work 40% of the time...
My date and I just sat there and picked apart all the screwy crap in the movie (at least I got to see it as a complimentary screening).
* Computer generated voices do not asphixicate (sp) from the lack of oxygen (in the scene with the "micrometeorite" )
* Repeat after me: KE = 1/2 mv^2. You know how fast the micrometerite have to travel to punch thru the spaceship's hull *and* armor? (Even the older apollo modules have a "bumper" for micrometeriorites".
* Even at 50% atmosphere, your eyeballs will be popping. Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi, 50% atm will mean a difference of 7 lbs per sq inch.
* Why would you want to transmit "DNA" as 3D coordinates? Woudn't transmitting it as "AGTC" be a LOT more efficient? And even if you *did* transmit it in 3D coords, you would still need a forth character to denote the DNA nucleoside bases. And, man, do you have any idea how big the Human DNA Genome is?
* Death by decompression is a lot worse than what they showed...
* Signal Latency from Mars is NOT 20 minutes, it's a lot lower than that.
Well, aside from that, I thought that the Kawasaki rover and the SGI panels were a cute touch 8-)
Hrm... I guess computer viruses now have a new meaning.
But, seriously... if they can use this to manupulate DNA in cells, can't they use this as a "processor" enviroment for DNA computing? There are problems that can be solved much quicker using DNA computing than traditional silicon approach.
LCDs work by blocking light. So, to make a panel to give off N brightness unit, the backlighting must be at least N bright, but it has to be brighter because even in transparent state you will not get 100% light transmission efficiency. (Even regular window glass only transmit 90% or so or light, I think).
LEDs work by light emission. If the LED emit N bightness unit, you only have to feed in the juice to give N brightness unit to get a N brightness unit panel...
If you read the article, you can see that this is *NOT* for LCD use. It's an L*E*D display.
LCD displays work by having an optically active (chiral) organic molecule layer (called the liquid crystal) sandwiched bewteeen 2 layers of polarizing filters, set at 90 degrees angle. When a current is applied the orientation of the liquid crystal layer changes, and the light's polarization plane doesn't get rotated the 90 degrees to clear the second filter. (Thus appearing to be dark). Take away the voltage, the crystals returns to ground state, plane polarized light is rotated 90 degrees, and it clears the second filter and appears to be transparent. This is how LCD displays on calculators work; color displays built on this principle and add a backlight on the back (ie, laptop) and by controlling the amount of light that passes thru for each pixel, generates the different colors. Note that the light emmision criteria has nothing to do with the liquid crystals; that's why you can't read your calculator in a dark room, and that's why palm devices have a backlight. Another cool thing to try is to take a polarizing sunglasses and hold it between your eye and the laptop screen and rotate it slowly. The display will get darker (at 90 deg) and brighter again (at a full 180 deg).
Now that we have amused ourselves with LCD technology, let's take a look at what these guys at Princeton actually did:
They found a new material that can be used in light emitting diodes. LEDs are used for indicator lights on the electronics that we all love. Traditionally, LED displays for flat panel applications are problematic for 2 reasons:
A: Making the pixels small enough, on a large display. B: Finding a materials for blue LEDs.
The problem with blue LEDs was solved a few years back, but as far as I know A is still a limitation. If you ever look at those big "SonyTron" LED displays in stadiums, up close the pixels are about the size of your THUMB.
In order for this to suceed, there needs to be a good commercial process to apply the OLED material onto an (ideally) plastic substrate. Plastic substrates are really the way to go because they are less prone to breakage and don't require massive retooling. Hopefully, since the material is organic in nature, incorporating it onto plastic won't be such a difficult idea.
Put the bite mark on the apple on the OTHER side and repost it. See, it's no longer the Apple trademark, is it? 8-) (I've heard that's how you tell some of the fake brand name clothes and lady's purses around - one particular brand, the crocodile faces the *OTHER* way. Not that I'd care, my Slashdot and Overclocked TShirts are good enough 8-) ) -=- SiKnight
First of all, as a former employee of Communications and Computing, and a lurker on the UW Linux group mailing list, contragulations on your recent achievements.
For those who wishes to learn about network security, what resources do you recommend (to learn from?) How does one go about learning about about network security, and how does one go about testing his knowledge on network security?
With the increasing commercialization of the internet, and "high stakes" website (such as online banking, ETrade, etc) there will be more and more need for a "security administrator". Currently there are standards in which IT professionals can be certified for system administration (such as Novell certification, MCSE, etc). Do you see a need for basic "security admin" certification and if so what are your suggestions as to implementing them? Do you think UW (or other colleges) for that matter should teach courses on network security?
... I have a bad feeling that it will backfire. Reasons are:
* We still have backwards, Cold War era cryptography rules. We still have a lot of issues to work out as far as exportable crypto goes.
* In order for this to work, there has to be a publicly available, widely dissimilated encryption standard. Even PGP havn't managed to do *that* yet. And, let's face it, even those who have it don't sign every piece of email with it.
* The American public is DUMB. You don't believe me? Fine, spend a quarter working in tech support. Even in a Univ. enviroment, I'm constantly amazed at how stupid the questions can be. Cryptography by it's nature is NOT an easy subject. Could you imagine how many loopholes lawyers can find, claiming ignorance in a signature dispute?
What I was refering to was that snafu earlier when they did the unit conversions wrong while caluculating the orbit of a space craft. One team did it in metric, another in foot-pounds-whatever, and kapow, there goes a rocket.
If you REALLY understand what this fight is about, you won't be doing this.
What the hell is there to stop you from selling (or, since you've got the list posted), from the MPAA to get that list, copy down the names of everyone on it, and send out a giant big-ass friggin' lawsuit with everyone on it? If I got a copy of the DeCSS source, mirroring it is one thing, but making an open confession that I have it, and signing my ass away on someone's shit list? HELL FSCKIN' NO.
The idea, is that we make sure that the DeCSS source is as widespread as possible. AND we want to make sure that people can grab the source and hide it, with the plausable deniability that they ever had it. That way, there will always be someone out there, and the expense to track and hunt down everyone with a copy of the source will make it financially impossible for even someone like the MPAA. A centralized list will only help them in their work.
We should print up a batch of "Free DVD" stickers. Something with a slogan to the effect of "A player for each OS" or "Equal Rights to viewing for everyone". And distribute them. And tell everyone what evils the MPAA is doing.
And, (perhaps sadly), since this concerns someone maybe paying a bit less for a DVD (as opposed to someone incarcerated for almost 5 years without trail), maybe more people would care. Bad publicity will probably sink the MPAA faster than an iceberg sinking the Titanic...
... open the specifications, if not the code, to the Deskjet printers.
Most home users, when they buy a HP, will buy a color inkjet, notibly the deskjets. These so call "Winprinters" require a Windows driver to convert the data to "Performance Printing Archetecture" (ie, kills your box's performance in order to print) and the PPA specs are NOT open. Fortunately for me and other unfortunate deskjet users, some brave soul out there had wrote a program called PBM2PPA that coverts postscript bitstream to PPA for printing. Of course, the conversion does a toll on my box and is only good for black and white, but at least printing is now a possibility...
I'm a chemistry major and math minor by training. Most of the important lab processes are named after their inventors (Kjedhall nitrogen analysis, Benedict's solution, Tollen's test, etc) and quite a few mathematical theorem are named after their discoverer. (Green's theorem, Stoke's theorem, Kepler's laws, the Bernoulli equation). The way I see it, patenting this is leading to a world of trouble:
1: How are we supposed to teach future generations this technique? Are we going to have to license the formula in a textbook on a per usage basis? Readers (University printed textbooks, in a binder) are expensive enough with all the copyright royalties.
2: If someone used a similar process to calculate FFTs, or do derivative work on the theory (which is the very basis of science - taking existing theory to model new ones) how the HELL are we going to do work with patents on something that basic?
Personally, I never expect to get a nobel price (or Field Medal (?) for mathematicians). If I get a chemical process named after me, to be printed in man pages and chemistry books, I'd die happy. And for most scientists I think that's one of the ultimate honor.
Conversely, I'd never want to go down in history book as the S.O.B. that patented something basic and spent the rest of his life suing people for patent violations. Or hiding secrets from others (a notable example of that would be Hooke, who discovered Hooke's law. He didn't publish it because he stood to benefit from being the only person to mathematically model springs. It wasn't until his death when he made references to where the equations were hidden).
Of course, I'm not saying that he will be running around suing people for patent violations. But then... who knows?
-=- SiKnight
PS: Ever wonder why mathematicans don't get Nobel prizes? Alfred Nobel's sweetheart ran off with one. That's why. Honest.
I have wired a rice cooker, a toaster, and my coffee maker on X10 control. Between the 3 of these devices, you can get quite a bit of cooking done. Granted, you won't be eating like a king, but it sure beats a microwaved dinner.
With a rice cooker, I wash the rice and load it in the night before. I compensate for the fact that the water's soaking the rice by using less water; and it works pretty well. With a toaster, I can load the bread in advance, pull it down, and power it on to toast. Rice cookers are great because they'll steam veggies (I'm a healthy geek), make marbled eggs, and cook certain meat dishes. I use my tea maker for tea and coffee, but if I get desperate, it works great for instant noodles too 8)
All this is connected to my Linux box, using BottleRocket (on Freshmeat), so about an hour before I go back home I ssh in and issue away the commands. I can't wait till I can do this on my handspring visor, but until then dropping in to a public access terminal (I'm a college student) works.
Well, now, hardly a better canidate for that post; after all, he did write that blue and white screensaver thingee that now runs on 90% of the PCs out there... 8-)
Look at the patent file, and take a good look at the amount of correlation to the keystrokes to the characters they represent. Now look at Graffiti.
It's obviously 2 very different systems. Graffiti is adapted from block print of the English alphabet; in cases where the alphabet takes 2 strokes to complete, graffiti uses one of the 2 strokes as the input sequence. Example, A is written as a upward pointing carat, without the bar in the middle, K is written like the less than sign ( ). This method is extremely EASY to learn, and I can hand my visor over to a 10 year old and he'd be able to figure it out in about 20 minutes, given the instructions.
OTOH, Xerox's system is based on route memorization. I know I would never use something like that.
IMHO, I think the lawsuit is stupid. Palm didn't copy what Xerox is doing, they made a MUCH better product. The only link is that a stylus is used for entry on both devices. But then again, if I patented a device that "links a human to a computer via finger action or palm action", does that mean I can go ahead and sue every keyboard, joystick, and mouse manufacturer?
The Grafitti is the first really commerically sucessful handwriting recognition system. Previous attempts to implement handwriting recognition on the Apple Newton failed somewhat miserably, it was slow and inaccurate. Xerox, to my knowledge, never tried to market their handwriting system.
I hope this works out to Palm computing's favor; Jeff Hawkins had the balls to assume that he can train a user to alter their handwriting slightly to get better handwriting recognition; and as a result his vision, his product took off.
So, what you are essentially saying is you don't care if your product is manufactured in a third world country by poor 5 years old living off maggot-infested rice. Sure, a few kids got their fingers cut off, but I'd still be able to get my brand name sneakers for 5 bux less, right?
We as a consumer are a powerful voice. I am sorry that you feel that way about businesses, but very business should have a moral obligation to conduct their businesses ethncially. There's a difference between being a sucessful business, and being a monopony. Recently there was just a lot of legal ruckus about a software company over that...
What if one day, as a result of Amazon.com's lawsuits and whatnot, they dominate the online book business, and decided that, A) The industry doesn't really need innovations and B) prices can go up because no one else can compete with them?
I don't know about you, but I think the "One-click shopping patent" is stupid, and in return for amazon.com's stupidity, I'm taking my business elsewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Can't we host it in a country (like Swisserland, which is politically neutral) and give Mattel the finger?
-=- SiKnight
You didn't quite balance the equation okay either, it's 2H2 + O2 --> 2H2O. 8-)
Also, you are still using a combustion, which has efficiencies limited by a thermodynamic Carnot cycle. If you took the hydrogen and pumped it into a FUEL CELL, the reaction is far more effective (theoratical limit is actually a 100%)
Fuel cells are already in use for power
generation, notable example is the space shuttle.
And, yes, abstracting the power source can mean more cleaner power generation methods (such as wind, tidal, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc).
-=- SiKnight
I thought that the PSX (dunno about PSX2) controller protocals are fairly well reversed engineered. Why not just jury rig something to either:
A: Capture the codes for analysis, ie, sniffing the PSX controller traffic, and
B: Using a PC to play back the signals?
The PSX2 takes regular PSX controllers if I remember correctly.
I imagine that the "40%" rate is because someone isn't entering the code properly. I don't imagine that the console designer included the debug code that would only work 40% of the time...
-=- SiKnight
My date and I just sat there and picked apart all the screwy crap in the movie (at least I got to see it as a complimentary screening).
* Computer generated voices do not asphixicate (sp) from the lack of oxygen (in the scene with the "micrometeorite" )
* Repeat after me: KE = 1/2 mv^2. You know how fast the micrometerite have to travel to punch thru the spaceship's hull *and* armor? (Even the older apollo modules have a "bumper" for micrometeriorites".
* Even at 50% atmosphere, your eyeballs will be popping. Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi, 50% atm will mean a difference of 7 lbs per sq inch.
* Why would you want to transmit "DNA" as 3D coordinates? Woudn't transmitting it as "AGTC" be a LOT more efficient? And even if you *did* transmit it in 3D coords, you would still need a forth character to denote the DNA nucleoside bases. And, man, do you have any idea how big the Human DNA Genome is?
* Death by decompression is a lot worse than what they showed...
* Signal Latency from Mars is NOT 20 minutes, it's a lot lower than that.
Well, aside from that, I thought that the Kawasaki rover and the SGI panels were a cute touch 8-)
-=- SiKnight
Hrm... I guess computer viruses now have a new meaning.
But, seriously... if they can use this to manupulate DNA in cells, can't they use this as a "processor" enviroment for DNA computing? There are problems that can be solved much quicker using DNA computing than traditional silicon approach.
-=- SiKnight
Make sense.
LCDs work by blocking light. So, to make a panel to give off N brightness unit, the backlighting must be at least N bright, but it has to be brighter because even in transparent state you will not get 100% light transmission efficiency. (Even regular window glass only transmit 90% or so or light, I think).
LEDs work by light emission. If the LED emit N bightness unit, you only have to feed in the juice to give N brightness unit to get a N brightness unit panel...
-=- SiKnight
If you read the article, you can see that this is *NOT* for LCD use. It's an L*E*D display.
LCD displays work by having an optically active (chiral) organic molecule layer (called the liquid crystal) sandwiched bewteeen 2 layers of polarizing filters, set at 90 degrees angle. When a current is applied the orientation of the liquid crystal layer changes, and the light's polarization plane doesn't get rotated the 90 degrees to clear the second filter. (Thus appearing to be dark). Take away the voltage, the crystals returns to ground state, plane polarized light is rotated 90 degrees, and it clears the second filter and appears to be transparent. This is how LCD displays on calculators work; color displays built on this principle and add a backlight on the back (ie, laptop) and by controlling the amount of light that passes thru for each pixel, generates the different colors. Note that the light emmision criteria has nothing to do with the liquid crystals; that's why you can't read your calculator in a dark room, and that's why palm devices have a backlight. Another cool thing to try is to take a polarizing sunglasses and hold it between your eye and the laptop screen and rotate it slowly. The display will get darker (at 90 deg) and brighter again (at a full 180 deg).
Now that we have amused ourselves with LCD technology, let's take a look at what these guys at Princeton actually did:
They found a new material that can be used in light emitting diodes. LEDs are used for indicator lights on the electronics that we all love. Traditionally, LED displays for flat panel applications are problematic for 2 reasons:
A: Making the pixels small enough, on a large display.
B: Finding a materials for blue LEDs.
The problem with blue LEDs was solved a few years back, but as far as I know A is still a limitation. If you ever look at those big "SonyTron" LED displays in stadiums, up close the pixels are about the size of your THUMB.
In order for this to suceed, there needs to be a good commercial process to apply the OLED material onto an (ideally) plastic substrate. Plastic substrates are really the way to go because they are less prone to breakage and don't require massive retooling. Hopefully, since the material is organic in nature, incorporating it onto plastic won't be such a difficult idea.
-=- Terence
Put the bite mark on the apple on the OTHER side and repost it. See, it's no longer the Apple trademark, is it? 8-) (I've heard that's how you tell some of the fake brand name clothes and lady's purses around - one particular brand, the crocodile faces the *OTHER* way. Not that I'd care, my Slashdot and Overclocked TShirts are good enough 8-) ) -=- SiKnight
First of all, as a former employee of Communications and Computing, and a lurker on the UW Linux group mailing list, contragulations on your recent achievements.
For those who wishes to learn about network security, what resources do you recommend (to learn from?) How does one go about learning about about network security, and how does one go about testing his knowledge on network security?
With the increasing commercialization of the internet, and "high stakes" website (such as online banking, ETrade, etc) there will be more and more need for a "security administrator". Currently there are standards in which IT professionals can be certified for system administration (such as Novell certification, MCSE, etc). Do you see a need for basic "security admin" certification and if so what are your suggestions as to implementing them? Do you think UW (or other colleges) for that matter should teach courses on network security?
-=- SiKnight
The 2600 group had called for worldwide leafletting campaign to educate the general public about this case. Public support and opinion helps!
Check out:
http://www.2600.com/ for more details as well as flyers to post.
I'm in Seattle, anyone have anything planned?
-=- SiKnight
... I have a bad feeling that it will backfire. Reasons are:
* We still have backwards, Cold War era cryptography rules. We still have a lot of issues to work out as far as exportable crypto goes.
* In order for this to work, there has to be a publicly available, widely dissimilated encryption standard. Even PGP havn't managed to do *that* yet. And, let's face it, even those who have it don't sign every piece of email with it.
* The American public is DUMB. You don't believe me? Fine, spend a quarter working in tech support. Even in a Univ. enviroment, I'm constantly amazed at how stupid the questions can be. Cryptography by it's nature is NOT an easy subject. Could you imagine how many loopholes lawyers can find, claiming ignorance in a signature dispute?
-=- SiKnight
What I was refering to was that snafu earlier when they did the unit conversions wrong while caluculating the orbit of a space craft. One team did it in metric, another in foot-pounds-whatever, and kapow, there goes a rocket.
9 dec/19991212.html
Check out:
http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/9
if you don't believe me 8-)
-=- SiKnight
we'll lend NASA some time on Distributed.net, in return, they switch to metric so they don't loose another space craft again... 8-)
-=- SiKnight
If you REALLY understand what this fight is about, you won't be doing this.
What the hell is there to stop you from selling (or, since you've got the list posted), from the MPAA to get that list, copy down the names of everyone on it, and send out a giant big-ass friggin' lawsuit with everyone on it? If I got a copy of the DeCSS source, mirroring it is one thing, but making an open confession that I have it, and signing my ass away on someone's shit list? HELL FSCKIN' NO.
The idea, is that we make sure that the DeCSS source is as widespread as possible. AND we want to make sure that people can grab the source and hide it, with the plausable deniability that they ever had it. That way, there will always be someone out there, and the expense to track and hunt down everyone with a copy of the source will make it financially impossible for even someone like the MPAA. A centralized list will only help them in their work.
-=- SiKnight
We should print up a batch of "Free DVD" stickers. Something with a slogan to the effect of "A player for each OS" or "Equal Rights to viewing for everyone". And distribute them. And tell everyone what evils the MPAA is doing.
And, (perhaps sadly), since this concerns someone maybe paying a bit less for a DVD (as opposed to someone incarcerated for almost 5 years without trail), maybe more people would care. Bad publicity will probably sink the MPAA faster than an iceberg sinking the Titanic...
-=- SiKnight
... open the specifications, if not the code, to the Deskjet printers.
Most home users, when they buy a HP, will buy a color inkjet, notibly the deskjets. These so call "Winprinters" require a Windows driver to convert the data to "Performance Printing Archetecture" (ie, kills your box's performance in order to print) and the PPA specs are NOT open. Fortunately for me and other unfortunate deskjet users, some brave soul out there had wrote a program called PBM2PPA that coverts postscript bitstream to PPA for printing. Of course, the conversion does a toll on my box and is only good for black and white, but at least printing is now a possibility...
-=- SiKnight
I'm a chemistry major and math minor by training. Most of the important lab processes are named after their inventors (Kjedhall nitrogen analysis, Benedict's solution, Tollen's test, etc) and quite a few mathematical theorem are named after their discoverer. (Green's theorem, Stoke's theorem, Kepler's laws, the Bernoulli equation). The way I see it, patenting this is leading to a world of trouble:
... who knows?
1: How are we supposed to teach future generations this technique? Are we going to have to license the formula in a textbook on a per usage basis? Readers (University printed textbooks, in a binder) are expensive enough with all the copyright royalties.
2: If someone used a similar process to calculate FFTs, or do derivative work on the theory (which is the very basis of science - taking existing theory to model new ones) how the HELL are we going to do work with patents on something that basic?
Personally, I never expect to get a nobel price (or Field Medal (?) for mathematicians). If I get a chemical process named after me, to be printed in man pages and chemistry books, I'd die happy. And for most scientists I think that's one of the ultimate honor.
Conversely, I'd never want to go down in history book as the S.O.B. that patented something basic and spent the rest of his life suing people for patent violations. Or hiding secrets from others (a notable example of that would be Hooke, who discovered Hooke's law. He didn't publish it because he stood to benefit from being the only person to mathematically model springs. It wasn't until his death when he made references to where the equations were hidden).
Of course, I'm not saying that he will be running around suing people for patent violations. But then
-=- SiKnight
PS: Ever wonder why mathematicans don't get Nobel prizes? Alfred Nobel's sweetheart ran off with one. That's why. Honest.
I have wired a rice cooker, a toaster, and my coffee maker on X10 control. Between the 3 of these devices, you can get quite a bit of cooking done. Granted, you won't be eating like a king, but it sure beats a microwaved dinner.
With a rice cooker, I wash the rice and load it in the night before. I compensate for the fact that the water's soaking the rice by using less water; and it works pretty well. With a toaster, I can load the bread in advance, pull it down, and power it on to toast. Rice cookers are great because they'll steam veggies (I'm a healthy geek), make marbled eggs, and cook certain meat dishes. I use my tea maker for tea and coffee, but if I get desperate, it works great for instant noodles too 8)
All this is connected to my Linux box, using BottleRocket (on Freshmeat), so about an hour before I go back home I ssh in and issue away the commands. I can't wait till I can do this on my handspring visor, but until then dropping in to a public access terminal (I'm a college student) works.
... SiKnight
Well, now, hardly a better canidate for that post; after all, he did write that blue and white screensaver thingee that now runs on 90% of the PCs out there... 8-)
-=- SiKnight
I disagree.
Look at the patent file, and take a good look at the amount of correlation to the keystrokes to the characters they represent. Now look at Graffiti.
It's obviously 2 very different systems. Graffiti is adapted from block print of the English alphabet; in cases where the alphabet takes 2 strokes to complete, graffiti uses one of the 2 strokes as the input sequence. Example, A is written as a upward pointing carat, without the bar in the middle, K is written like the less than sign ( ). This method is extremely EASY to learn, and I can hand my visor over to a 10 year old and he'd be able to figure it out in about 20 minutes, given the instructions.
OTOH, Xerox's system is based on route memorization. I know I would never use something like that.
IMHO, I think the lawsuit is stupid. Palm didn't copy what Xerox is doing, they made a MUCH better product. The only link is that a stylus is used for entry on both devices. But then again, if I patented a device that "links a human to a computer via finger action or palm action", does that mean I can go ahead and sue every keyboard, joystick, and mouse manufacturer?
-=- SiKnight
The Grafitti is the first really commerically sucessful handwriting recognition system. Previous attempts to implement handwriting recognition on the Apple Newton failed somewhat miserably, it was slow and inaccurate. Xerox, to my knowledge, never tried to market their handwriting system.
I hope this works out to Palm computing's favor; Jeff Hawkins had the balls to assume that he can train a user to alter their handwriting slightly to get better handwriting recognition; and as a result his vision, his product took off.
-=- SiKnight
I think the fish finder's a cooler hack. At least that uses the gameboy as a something more than just a display.
i pherals/pocketsonar.html
http://members.xoom.com/nintendorep/gameboy/per
-=- SiKnight
:: Sinister voice ::
..."
"There is nothing wrong with your radio
Do not adjust your radio set.
We are in control of this transmission
-=- SiKnight
GetFriends(Friend 1, Friend 2, Friend 3, Friend 4);
if (Friend 1 = normal) && (Friend 2 = normal) && (Friend 3 = normal) && (Friend 4 = normal)
then
You're nuts. 8-)
== SiKnight
So, what you are essentially saying is you don't care if your product is manufactured in a third world country by poor 5 years old living off maggot-infested rice. Sure, a few kids got their fingers cut off, but I'd still be able to get my brand name sneakers for 5 bux less, right?
We as a consumer are a powerful voice. I am sorry that you feel that way about businesses, but very business should have a moral obligation to conduct their businesses ethncially. There's a difference between being a sucessful business, and being a monopony. Recently there was just a lot of legal ruckus about a software company over that...
What if one day, as a result of Amazon.com's lawsuits and whatnot, they dominate the online book business, and decided that, A) The industry doesn't really need innovations and B) prices can go up because no one else can compete with them?
I don't know about you, but I think the "One-click shopping patent" is stupid, and in return for amazon.com's stupidity, I'm taking my business elsewhere.
-=- SiKnight