Everyone has their cubicle or "area" but it's just another panoptic workplace surveillance system so capital can track and regulate labour. Making it "fun" or "cool looking" is of no relevance to me. Changing how work is organised and accomplished is much more interesting.
Of course, given the depth of indoctrination in our society, speaking about such things is 21st century blasphemy. After all, we know what "works" - even though what "works" is pushing us all over a cliff of ecocide.
that could become the eyes and ears of soldiers on the battlefield, helping to save thousands of lives,
so, lemme get this straight - on a battlefield where, ostensibly, some kind o f a battle is going on, where people are murdering each other in cold blood, these little magical toys are going to prevent thousands of people from dying, in a battle, where people are murdering each other in cold blood . Riiiiiight. Let's unpack the happy ass bullshit and get to the core: these will be implemented in order to protect and project the interests of the EMPIRE (American, Chinese, Russian, whatever) that has the money to build these things. Saving LIVES by PREVENTING DEATHS is not part of the equation. That's the province of clever diplomacy.
And the best part? I'm sure some locals who are finding these expensive little toys invading their resource rich homeland will develop a cheap bug zapper that costs $8 to build and can take out thousands of them at a go.
First off, yes there are restrictions on Cube from the USA having to do with the character of the embargo. Proof? Look at the quality of the automotive stock in Cuba... Obviously Cuba is having difficulty trading for automobiles. Why? Because of the Embargo. The only things that get into Cuba of consequence are foreign tourist dollars. Countries that liberalise trade with Cuba fall under sanctions by the USA. So, YES even CANADIANS have to put up with that shit, as does the rest of the world. Otherwise, Cuba would never have collapsed when the soviets left - they could have traded their stuff for other stuff, gotten loans and similar trade activities going. Your argument is neither insightful nor informative. It is just typical American Jingoism parading as common sense and recieved wisdom, when it is, in fact, neither.
Your statement: And calling an embargo "imperialist" is pretty rich... what would you call it if the US had normal relations with Cuba and there was a Starbucks and a McDonalds on every corner in Havana? Oh, right... you'd call it "cultural imperialism" or something similar. is also utter horeshit, because I never said any such things, and you are presuming that I would say (x) based on an argument you pulled out of your own ass. Both of your paragraphs are wrong, the first factually, the second by fallacy of argument.
given that there isn't going to be much of an airline industry in 2020. By then, fuel will be so expensive, air travel will revert to what it was prior to the 1970s: something the rich did.
Basically, the American restrictions on Cuba are total bullshit, and the rest of the world knows it. however, due to longstanding imperialist policies (like the Monroe doctrine) Cuba falls under the geographic hegemony of the USA. This was challenged by the CCCP from 1959 - 1991. When the Russians collapsed, Cuba had some "special times", like super special shitty times, that the draconian and retarded embargo by the USA only enhanced.
So, now Venezuela has come to Cuba's assistance by helping with data cable. This is very good news for the American Empire, as this has their enemies paying for the cable they can waltz in and appropriate when they topple Raul Castro (or whoever succeeds him). Assuming the Democrats sweep in November, the posture towards Cuba will shift a bit, but only insofar as it benefits the USA. Expect a President McCain to invade Cuba, a President Clinton to encircle and crush Cuba's regime, and a president Obama to subvert and destroy it. Once that has happened, they will then set about dismantling the entire gov't system with the same "shock therapy" that worked so well in Russia. See Naomi Kleins book on the subject.
So, expect the USA to turn a big blind eye to this kind of infrastructural investment, as it will save them money later when they take the place over.
Contrary to some of the above comments, Cuba is VERY strategic to USA interests - it will become the jump off point for dominating South America, as global hegemonic forces (EU, USA, Russia, China) retreat into regional power centers under a doctrine of multipolar competition. This condition will be forced upon these empires due to the collapse of oil production and competition over the remaining sources. For more on that, I would recommend "Resource Wars" by Klare and "The Prize" by Yergin.
Five is not equal to four
The ancient Egyptians did not watch Seinfeld
The tsetse fly is not native to North America
OK. 5 = 4. I can build a mathematics that works that says 5 = 4, by abstracting the number 5 into a super position, where 5 = (x). so, in YOUR math, 5 can't equal 4, but in MY math 5 can equal whatever I want.
We have no proof of the Egyptians watching or not watching Seinfeld. We can make a good ASSUMPTION they did not do so, but we have no PROOF they did not do so. Proof and deduction are two different things.
Tsetse fly not native to N America? When? Today, perhaps, but 100 million years ago the Americas and Africa were joined...
Ab-so-fucking-lutely. Why is it that you and I see that, but so many others have this "flash-induced-reality-distortion-field" about them? It's really sad and pathetic. Silverlight has a better UI. Unfortunately, it's a total Piece o' crap. (sigh)
For one thing, a real, actual law
of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction.
This law states that that a proposition cannot be both true
and not true. Nothing is both true and false.
OK: "this statement is wrong."
Goedel blew that article's line of reasoning out the door 80 years ago.
I hate flash - not th ersults - I basically don't care about the results, per se, but using flash is one of the most irritating, counter-intuitive, fucked up experiences in software.
Perhaps with SWF and FLV opened up, someone can construct an alternative to flash that's actually easy to use.
USgov: OK Mister smarty pants commie chip maker! PROVE TO ME that YOU"RE NOT putting malware into your chips!
ChipMaker: Sorry, I can't do that.
USgov: And WHY NOT???
ChipMaker: Because it's logically impossible you retarded oaf. You can't prove a negative.
USGov: But if you DON'T then we will have to TAKE ACTION!
ChipMaker: Oh, jeez... like what? You bumbling fuckhead!
USGov: we will STOP BUYING CHIPS from you! We will build them ourselves!
ChipMaker: Sorry, Wally, but you're not going to get that past your neoliberal internal trade agreements. I can see it now: "USGov goes into Chip Making"... Intel, AMD, and IBM would crack a loaf in their pants and sue. No, you'll have to subcontract to them, and they will have to set up a multijillion dollar fab plant in the USA that is populated by expensive american workers, and suddenly every laptop made for the USGov will be slower and more expensive than any other laptop on the market. Good move, Ace. Lemme know how that works out for ya.
USGov: buh buh buh WE NEED SECURITY!!!!
ChipMaker: look, dumbass, we make chips. We don't care what they go in, we don't care what they do, we just make chips. Test them all you want, you're not going to find anything, because we really don't give a shit. Now, if the ultraparanoid wing of your wingnut contingent can't swing with that, tought shit.
USGov: it would be SO much better if you simply PROVE THAT YOU'RE NOT putting bad things in our chips.
chipMaker: (sigh). How's this, USGov, just shut the fuck up, and get with the program.
USGov: But WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS!!!!
ChipMaker: WHEN were your FREEDOMS ever attacked? Some crazy fucking nutjobs from a loosely organised international political crime syndicate flew some planes into your buildings. They didn't attack your freedom, they just wanted you to get your jarheads out of Saudi Arabia. And then you invaded Iraq. "I'd like to know when Iraq attacked your freedoms - I'd like to know what day it was when the Iraqi Invasion Force stormed your beaches and dumped hot lead into your freedoms, because I must been on vacation that day in someplace called REALITY." Your paranoid abuse of logic is THE SAME. And we, the Rest Of The World, are getting sick and fucking tired of your penny ante tirades that end up getting thousands of people killed. So, for the jillionth time: NO, We Can't PROVE that our chips are not full of malware, because you CAN'T PROVE A NEGATIVE. You can test all you want, but you will never be 100% sure, and thusly, you're an idiot for demanding it. Heck - even if you build them yourself, you have no proof, as some employee might etch a wee corner of the chip to cause a computer to make fart noises and blit every other frame to the screen with an image of Jesus butt raping Mohammed, but only on even numbered Tuesdays.
USGov: BUT WE WANT SECURITY!!! We want to PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS!!!
ChipMaker: OK, OK, you fucking moron: "I solemnly swear, cross my heart and hope to die, that there is no bad stuff on any of the chips we make. Promise. Now, is that better?"
USGov: YOU ARE A GREAT ALLY!!! I feel so much more secure now.
a: saved to tape and sent to a vault on a daily basis
b: recorded by the NSA, who also saves and backs up data
So, it's all a load of bullshit - they're thinking that the public is stupid enough to buy it, or, simply kick it down the road another month or two until the ADHD press finds something shiny to get distracted by like Miley Cyrus Boobs or another blast from Trainwreck Spears.
They won't do it because of two and a half fundamental reasons:
1. MSOffice
2. Profit Margins
3. History as Computer Maker
If Apple put MacOS onto other machines, MS would pull support for MSOffice on MacOS in a New York Nanosecond. That would seriously batter Apple computer sales, because many of us (myself included) are forced by our employers to use MSOffice. Yes, OpenOffice is a lovely thing, but our IT dept and management doesn't give a flying fuck about OpenOffice, and never will. It's an MS shop and that's that. They don't care what COMPUTER you use - so I have a MacBookPro - but the software for our daily interactions Must Be MS. (sigh - I know, I know)...
So, That's Reason #1 (with a gun to the head) why Apple won't open up.
2. Apple makes Serious Bank on their high end machines (desktop or laptop) and opening up would blow those margins to the wind because if you're so up on a high end machine, you could probably build something to rival today's fire breathing dragon at a substantially lower cost than what HP and certainly Apple would charge you.
Also, Apple depends on that margin, as it allows them to use that money to seed other projects, some few of which might pan out (iPod, iTMS) and some more that won't do so well (AirTunes, AppleTV) some that seriously Tank (20th Anniversay Mac) and some that leave expensive craters in the ground (Pippin, Newton, The Cube). Without the margins Apple pulls from their high-end gear, none of those ventures would have happened, and while Pippin was a fucking disaster, the iPod is anything but.
So, they're not going to cannibalise their bovine cash dispenser.
3. History as a computer company. They are known first as a computer company, that happens to make totally hip consumer items. This will change over time, as computers slowly fade into the woodwork, but until then, their flagship product is MacOS - it's the one thing that ties all their products together, and it is intimately tied to their vision as a computer company.
So, for all those reason (and I am sure, many more) Apple will not open up their OS. It would be suicide.
The company says it plans to develop a NAFTA-enabled distribution network for inedible sugar from Mexico at 1/8th the cost of trade-protected sugar, to use as raw material for making ethanol.
OK. And exactly HOW do they intend to get that sugar junk from Mexico to some exurban numbskull who falls for this idiot scheme in, say, Seattle, or New Hampshire?
Oh, that's right - they'll TRUCK IT. So, they will burn hundreds of gallons of high quality PETROLEUM to ship organic junk to New Hampshire so some idiot can rev up his ethanol machine to generate fuel that has a FRACTION of the energy density of deisel fuel used to deliver it, just so he can stick in his SUV so he can schlep his fat ass a mile down the road to pick up some smokes and a six pack of Budweiser.
If there is a platonic world contacted by math where these great mathematical truths exist, then we live in a very different universe from the one where mathematics is a product of the human brain.
To say we "discover" something with math assumes that the math is "real", and if so, then how we acquire information from such a realm (that clearly doesn't exist in the physical realm) becomes a very significant and serious issue regarding the composition of the universe - far more disturbing than the "missing mass of the universe."
If we deny that we discover things in math, but instead create things in math, then we are in a different quandary, because then mathematics takes on a certain arbitrariness, and investigations in maths becomes something more like butterfly or stamp collecting than the Fearless and Intrepid Discovery that gives us a reason to go on discovering things.
If it's invention, then the process is more like Sodoku - filling in the blanks of the universe, as opposed to finding New and Important Things about the world.
My personal guess is that it is neither - there are things about the universe we can find that is mathematic - specifically, numeracy, which permits addition and subtraction. (Some more things, some fewer things), but the rest of it we make up, as "higher mathematics" (anything above counting, addition and subtraction) is our language center's abstraction capacity playing games with our inherent numerical sensibilities. If i had to come down on one side or the other, i'd side with invention over discovery. I don't think humans are all that special, and I don't think we were built to figure out how the universe works.
Correct. Quantities do exist in the universe - otherwise, the universe wouldn't have things in it, it would just be one big undifferentiated mass.
But the rest of it? Nope. It's our language center tapping in to our numeracy center, and then confabulating all this "math".
The Platonists are funny - they get all worked up about this "NO!!! WE ARE DISCOVERING TRUTHS!!!" and well, they're not, but it's nice that they think they are - gives them and their pointy little heads something to thump their chests over.
A good book on a similar topic is Stanislaus Dehaene's "The Number Sense".
1. it wasn't whipped cream, it was shaving cream, which washes off a lot more easily.
2. There were so many delays in getting that cover done, that the model got pregnant. No big deal had they simply gone and done the shoot. But by the time they took the picture she was well into her 5th or 6th month. The more you look at it, the more you'll notice it.
3. It's a fucking awesome record. For those born after 1970 or so, this is how you act like a middle class WASP of the 1960s:
Make some martinis, on a sunny sunday afternoon, turn on a golf game on the TV set, turn off the sound and stack up the Herb Alpert records on your Garrard or Dual turntable as you drink your martini. Talk about your broker, or what the neighbours have done to their backyard. Yell at the kids to get off the lawn.
good Grief - they sound like titles to REALLY BAD MOVIES, the kind with some violent dork like Steven Seagal or Chuck Norris in it.
Those kinds of titles are so lame, my friends and I no longer use them as they are utterly generic, so we call them "Adjective/Noun Movies".
RS: "What did you do this weekend?"
OldFriend: "Saw a movie."
RS: "which one?"
OF: "Adjective Noun with Steven Seagal."
RS: "Oh. How bad was it?"
OF: "OK. Lots of shit blowed up. The Ingenue had a really nice rack. Oh, and a bad guy's head exploded after he picked his nose. That was funny. And the ingenue had a REALLY nice rack."
RS: sounds terrible.
OF: It was. nice rack, though.
Whenever I see a modifier noun title, I get VERY suspicious, and if the words suggest some kind of violence or suddeness, then it's sure to be a stinker. I mean, when would we EVER see some violent POS called "Fluffy Tufts"?
RS
Re:Smells like standard record company BS
on
ISP Sued By Irish RIAA
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I agree with you, and, I would add this:
That the idea of file sniffing software is sheer idiocy, prima facie. Why? Because all you have to do is "compress" the mp3 into a zip file, and bingo: no more mp3, just a zip, and if they start opening up every zip that's emailed or set up in the net, the entire interweb thingie would grind to an instant halt.
All of this was dealt with at Napster (I used to work there) and we scenario-ised all different combinations of spoofing and clamping etc. We thought of going after file names, so then we started writing names in 1337, Nirvana-SmellsLikeTeenSpirit.mp3 started popping up as n1rv4n4-sm3lzL1|
That was also circumventable by editing the file using a destructive editor and recompressing it. Even still the system would catch a massive number of files. We were concerned about people skipping around Napster because Napster was developing a billing client. The efforts did not mollify the RIAA and the rest was history.
Since then, I've thought of compressing the files into a zip, and if there was a client that could autozip-unzip on the client side, then it wouldn't affect the network at all.
Also, there was a program called metasynth that could turn sound into an image file (like a BMP), and then people could trade BMP files that could then be turned into audio.
So, the research is still there, and all it takes is an open source free-as-in-beer translational file system to circumvent ANY sniffer from the RIAA, especially now that drive space is practically free. Such a translator would take the contents of an audio file, translate it into a BMP and then automatically compressed into a zip. At the other end, the translator takes the zip, unzips it, and then translates the BMP into an mp3. Done. The zip file is left in a "sharing" folder, and the mp3 is autoloaded into iTunes. Today's Multiprocessor machines would make this kind of computation a trivial task.
If anyone decides to build such a thing, please be kind and let me know by naming it "Pushover", because that's what it does. Personally I have neither the time, inclination, or skillset to program such a thing. Next life time, maybe.
There is NO way the RIAA can win this. They are fighting a losing battle. The ONLY way they can win is by getting in with the major ISPs (ATT, SBC, Verizon, Sympatico, Rogers, etc.) and collude with them to enforce selective traffic shaping/blocking. Some ISPs are already doing that to optimise bandwidth - all it would take is something more organised. Which is why Net Neutrality is so crucial.
I have my MacbookPro sitting in front of me. It is hooked up to a 19in 3x4 ratio (i.e. "normal") flat monitor. when I need vertical, I use the external monitor, when I don't (which is most of the time, I use the MacBookPro widescreen. Over all, with two monitors, I have WAY more real estate than I need.
The planet has almost seven billion people on it. That's a lot of meat, and we wouldn't be harming sweet little animals by eating them. I think we should start with the Americans. They're fat and lazy, so they're easy to catch - kind of like dodo birds without the feathers.
They'll fry up really nicely. And then we can start on the Chinese and the Indians. There's lots of them, so that's a herd that'll take a long time to cull out. In fact, we may never even need to eat the bony butts of east africa.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, given the depth of indoctrination in our society, speaking about such things is 21st century blasphemy. After all, we know what "works" - even though what "works" is pushing us all over a cliff of ecocide.
sigh....
RS
RS
so, lemme get this straight - on a battlefield where, ostensibly, some kind o f a battle is going on, where people are murdering each other in cold blood, these little magical toys are going to prevent thousands of people from dying, in a battle, where people are murdering each other in cold blood . Riiiiiight. Let's unpack the happy ass bullshit and get to the core: these will be implemented in order to protect and project the interests of the EMPIRE (American, Chinese, Russian, whatever) that has the money to build these things. Saving LIVES by PREVENTING DEATHS is not part of the equation. That's the province of clever diplomacy.
And the best part? I'm sure some locals who are finding these expensive little toys invading their resource rich homeland will develop a cheap bug zapper that costs $8 to build and can take out thousands of them at a go.
RS
First off, yes there are restrictions on Cube from the USA having to do with the character of the embargo. Proof? Look at the quality of the automotive stock in Cuba... Obviously Cuba is having difficulty trading for automobiles. Why? Because of the Embargo. The only things that get into Cuba of consequence are foreign tourist dollars. Countries that liberalise trade with Cuba fall under sanctions by the USA. So, YES even CANADIANS have to put up with that shit, as does the rest of the world. Otherwise, Cuba would never have collapsed when the soviets left - they could have traded their stuff for other stuff, gotten loans and similar trade activities going. Your argument is neither insightful nor informative. It is just typical American Jingoism parading as common sense and recieved wisdom, when it is, in fact, neither.
Your statement: And calling an embargo "imperialist" is pretty rich... what would you call it if the US had normal relations with Cuba and there was a Starbucks and a McDonalds on every corner in Havana? Oh, right... you'd call it "cultural imperialism" or something similar. is also utter horeshit, because I never said any such things, and you are presuming that I would say (x) based on an argument you pulled out of your own ass. Both of your paragraphs are wrong, the first factually, the second by fallacy of argument.
You are a troll.
RS
RS
So, now Venezuela has come to Cuba's assistance by helping with data cable. This is very good news for the American Empire, as this has their enemies paying for the cable they can waltz in and appropriate when they topple Raul Castro (or whoever succeeds him). Assuming the Democrats sweep in November, the posture towards Cuba will shift a bit, but only insofar as it benefits the USA. Expect a President McCain to invade Cuba, a President Clinton to encircle and crush Cuba's regime, and a president Obama to subvert and destroy it. Once that has happened, they will then set about dismantling the entire gov't system with the same "shock therapy" that worked so well in Russia. See Naomi Kleins book on the subject.
So, expect the USA to turn a big blind eye to this kind of infrastructural investment, as it will save them money later when they take the place over.
Contrary to some of the above comments, Cuba is VERY strategic to USA interests - it will become the jump off point for dominating South America, as global hegemonic forces (EU, USA, Russia, China) retreat into regional power centers under a doctrine of multipolar competition. This condition will be forced upon these empires due to the collapse of oil production and competition over the remaining sources. For more on that, I would recommend "Resource Wars" by Klare and "The Prize" by Yergin.
RS
Examples given:
Five is not equal to four
The ancient Egyptians did not watch Seinfeld
The tsetse fly is not native to North America
OK. 5 = 4. I can build a mathematics that works that says 5 = 4, by abstracting the number 5 into a super position, where 5 = (x). so, in YOUR math, 5 can't equal 4, but in MY math 5 can equal whatever I want.
We have no proof of the Egyptians watching or not watching Seinfeld. We can make a good ASSUMPTION they did not do so, but we have no PROOF they did not do so. Proof and deduction are two different things.
Tsetse fly not native to N America? When? Today, perhaps, but 100 million years ago the Americas and Africa were joined...
RS
RS
from the article linked:
For one thing, a real, actual law of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction. This law states that that a proposition cannot be both true and not true. Nothing is both true and false.
OK: "this statement is wrong."
Goedel blew that article's line of reasoning out the door 80 years ago.
RS
Perhaps with SWF and FLV opened up, someone can construct an alternative to flash that's actually easy to use.
RS
ChipMaker: Sorry, I can't do that.
USgov: And WHY NOT???
ChipMaker: Because it's logically impossible you retarded oaf. You can't prove a negative.
USGov: But if you DON'T then we will have to TAKE ACTION!
ChipMaker: Oh, jeez... like what? You bumbling fuckhead!
USGov: we will STOP BUYING CHIPS from you! We will build them ourselves!
ChipMaker: Sorry, Wally, but you're not going to get that past your neoliberal internal trade agreements. I can see it now: "USGov goes into Chip Making"... Intel, AMD, and IBM would crack a loaf in their pants and sue. No, you'll have to subcontract to them, and they will have to set up a multijillion dollar fab plant in the USA that is populated by expensive american workers, and suddenly every laptop made for the USGov will be slower and more expensive than any other laptop on the market. Good move, Ace. Lemme know how that works out for ya.
USGov: buh buh buh WE NEED SECURITY!!!!
ChipMaker: look, dumbass, we make chips. We don't care what they go in, we don't care what they do, we just make chips. Test them all you want, you're not going to find anything, because we really don't give a shit. Now, if the ultraparanoid wing of your wingnut contingent can't swing with that, tought shit.
USGov: it would be SO much better if you simply PROVE THAT YOU'RE NOT putting bad things in our chips.
chipMaker: (sigh). How's this, USGov, just shut the fuck up, and get with the program.
USGov: But WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS!!!!
ChipMaker: WHEN were your FREEDOMS ever attacked? Some crazy fucking nutjobs from a loosely organised international political crime syndicate flew some planes into your buildings. They didn't attack your freedom, they just wanted you to get your jarheads out of Saudi Arabia. And then you invaded Iraq. "I'd like to know when Iraq attacked your freedoms - I'd like to know what day it was when the Iraqi Invasion Force stormed your beaches and dumped hot lead into your freedoms, because I must been on vacation that day in someplace called REALITY." Your paranoid abuse of logic is THE SAME. And we, the Rest Of The World, are getting sick and fucking tired of your penny ante tirades that end up getting thousands of people killed. So, for the jillionth time: NO, We Can't PROVE that our chips are not full of malware, because you CAN'T PROVE A NEGATIVE. You can test all you want, but you will never be 100% sure, and thusly, you're an idiot for demanding it. Heck - even if you build them yourself, you have no proof, as some employee might etch a wee corner of the chip to cause a computer to make fart noises and blit every other frame to the screen with an image of Jesus butt raping Mohammed, but only on even numbered Tuesdays.
USGov: BUT WE WANT SECURITY!!! We want to PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS!!!
ChipMaker: OK, OK, you fucking moron: "I solemnly swear, cross my heart and hope to die, that there is no bad stuff on any of the chips we make. Promise. Now, is that better?"
USGov: YOU ARE A GREAT ALLY!!! I feel so much more secure now.
RS
We have always been at war with Oceania.
a: saved to tape and sent to a vault on a daily basis
b: recorded by the NSA, who also saves and backs up data
So, it's all a load of bullshit - they're thinking that the public is stupid enough to buy it, or, simply kick it down the road another month or two until the ADHD press finds something shiny to get distracted by like Miley Cyrus Boobs or another blast from Trainwreck Spears.
RS
1. MSOffice
2. Profit Margins
3. History as Computer Maker
If Apple put MacOS onto other machines, MS would pull support for MSOffice on MacOS in a New York Nanosecond. That would seriously batter Apple computer sales, because many of us (myself included) are forced by our employers to use MSOffice. Yes, OpenOffice is a lovely thing, but our IT dept and management doesn't give a flying fuck about OpenOffice, and never will. It's an MS shop and that's that. They don't care what COMPUTER you use - so I have a MacBookPro - but the software for our daily interactions Must Be MS. (sigh - I know, I know)...
So, That's Reason #1 (with a gun to the head) why Apple won't open up.
2. Apple makes Serious Bank on their high end machines (desktop or laptop) and opening up would blow those margins to the wind because if you're so up on a high end machine, you could probably build something to rival today's fire breathing dragon at a substantially lower cost than what HP and certainly Apple would charge you.
Also, Apple depends on that margin, as it allows them to use that money to seed other projects, some few of which might pan out (iPod, iTMS) and some more that won't do so well (AirTunes, AppleTV) some that seriously Tank (20th Anniversay Mac) and some that leave expensive craters in the ground (Pippin, Newton, The Cube). Without the margins Apple pulls from their high-end gear, none of those ventures would have happened, and while Pippin was a fucking disaster, the iPod is anything but.
So, they're not going to cannibalise their bovine cash dispenser.
3. History as a computer company. They are known first as a computer company, that happens to make totally hip consumer items. This will change over time, as computers slowly fade into the woodwork, but until then, their flagship product is MacOS - it's the one thing that ties all their products together, and it is intimately tied to their vision as a computer company.
So, for all those reason (and I am sure, many more) Apple will not open up their OS. It would be suicide.
RS
RS
OK. And exactly HOW do they intend to get that sugar junk from Mexico to some exurban numbskull who falls for this idiot scheme in, say, Seattle, or New Hampshire?
Oh, that's right - they'll TRUCK IT. So, they will burn hundreds of gallons of high quality PETROLEUM to ship organic junk to New Hampshire so some idiot can rev up his ethanol machine to generate fuel that has a FRACTION of the energy density of deisel fuel used to deliver it, just so he can stick in his SUV so he can schlep his fat ass a mile down the road to pick up some smokes and a six pack of Budweiser.
Now THAT'S what I call a fine use of resources.
Here's an EXCELLENT lecture on the stupidity of biofuels.
RS
To say we "discover" something with math assumes that the math is "real", and if so, then how we acquire information from such a realm (that clearly doesn't exist in the physical realm) becomes a very significant and serious issue regarding the composition of the universe - far more disturbing than the "missing mass of the universe."
If we deny that we discover things in math, but instead create things in math, then we are in a different quandary, because then mathematics takes on a certain arbitrariness, and investigations in maths becomes something more like butterfly or stamp collecting than the Fearless and Intrepid Discovery that gives us a reason to go on discovering things.
If it's invention, then the process is more like Sodoku - filling in the blanks of the universe, as opposed to finding New and Important Things about the world.
My personal guess is that it is neither - there are things about the universe we can find that is mathematic - specifically, numeracy, which permits addition and subtraction. (Some more things, some fewer things), but the rest of it we make up, as "higher mathematics" (anything above counting, addition and subtraction) is our language center's abstraction capacity playing games with our inherent numerical sensibilities. If i had to come down on one side or the other, i'd side with invention over discovery. I don't think humans are all that special, and I don't think we were built to figure out how the universe works.
RS
Check it out. cool stuff.
RS
But the rest of it? Nope. It's our language center tapping in to our numeracy center, and then confabulating all this "math".
The Platonists are funny - they get all worked up about this "NO!!! WE ARE DISCOVERING TRUTHS!!!" and well, they're not, but it's nice that they think they are - gives them and their pointy little heads something to thump their chests over.
A good book on a similar topic is Stanislaus Dehaene's "The Number Sense".
RS
2. There were so many delays in getting that cover done, that the model got pregnant. No big deal had they simply gone and done the shoot. But by the time they took the picture she was well into her 5th or 6th month. The more you look at it, the more you'll notice it.
3. It's a fucking awesome record. For those born after 1970 or so, this is how you act like a middle class WASP of the 1960s:
Make some martinis, on a sunny sunday afternoon, turn on a golf game on the TV set, turn off the sound and stack up the Herb Alpert records on your Garrard or Dual turntable as you drink your martini. Talk about your broker, or what the neighbours have done to their backyard. Yell at the kids to get off the lawn.
RS
Rapid Onset, Vital Passage and Sudden Thrust
good Grief - they sound like titles to REALLY BAD MOVIES, the kind with some violent dork like Steven Seagal or Chuck Norris in it.
Those kinds of titles are so lame, my friends and I no longer use them as they are utterly generic, so we call them "Adjective/Noun Movies".
RS: "What did you do this weekend?"
OldFriend: "Saw a movie."
RS: "which one?"
OF: "Adjective Noun with Steven Seagal."
RS: "Oh. How bad was it?"
OF: "OK. Lots of shit blowed up. The Ingenue had a really nice rack. Oh, and a bad guy's head exploded after he picked his nose. That was funny. And the ingenue had a REALLY nice rack."
RS: sounds terrible.
OF: It was. nice rack, though.
Whenever I see a modifier noun title, I get VERY suspicious, and if the words suggest some kind of violence or suddeness, then it's sure to be a stinker. I mean, when would we EVER see some violent POS called "Fluffy Tufts"?
RS
That the idea of file sniffing software is sheer idiocy, prima facie. Why? Because all you have to do is "compress" the mp3 into a zip file, and bingo: no more mp3, just a zip, and if they start opening up every zip that's emailed or set up in the net, the entire interweb thingie would grind to an instant halt.
All of this was dealt with at Napster (I used to work there) and we scenario-ised all different combinations of spoofing and clamping etc. We thought of going after file names, so then we started writing names in 1337, Nirvana-SmellsLikeTeenSpirit.mp3 started popping up as n1rv4n4-sm3lzL1| That was also circumventable by editing the file using a destructive editor and recompressing it. Even still the system would catch a massive number of files. We were concerned about people skipping around Napster because Napster was developing a billing client. The efforts did not mollify the RIAA and the rest was history.
Since then, I've thought of compressing the files into a zip, and if there was a client that could autozip-unzip on the client side, then it wouldn't affect the network at all.
Also, there was a program called metasynth that could turn sound into an image file (like a BMP), and then people could trade BMP files that could then be turned into audio.
So, the research is still there, and all it takes is an open source free-as-in-beer translational file system to circumvent ANY sniffer from the RIAA, especially now that drive space is practically free. Such a translator would take the contents of an audio file, translate it into a BMP and then automatically compressed into a zip. At the other end, the translator takes the zip, unzips it, and then translates the BMP into an mp3. Done. The zip file is left in a "sharing" folder, and the mp3 is autoloaded into iTunes. Today's Multiprocessor machines would make this kind of computation a trivial task.
If anyone decides to build such a thing, please be kind and let me know by naming it "Pushover", because that's what it does. Personally I have neither the time, inclination, or skillset to program such a thing. Next life time, maybe.
There is NO way the RIAA can win this. They are fighting a losing battle. The ONLY way they can win is by getting in with the major ISPs (ATT, SBC, Verizon, Sympatico, Rogers, etc.) and collude with them to enforce selective traffic shaping/blocking. Some ISPs are already doing that to optimise bandwidth - all it would take is something more organised. Which is why Net Neutrality is so crucial.
RS
I bring it with me - I have a macbookPro and I don't use public terminals. You can get cooties that way.
RS
An Obelisk that sends out a brain splitting shriek on all radio frequencies?
Or, perhaps the the mind of HAL itself which is what DARPA wants to become by way of Skynet?
Mebbe, mebbe not.
RS
Solution: GET A SECOND MONITOR.
RS
They'll fry up really nicely. And then we can start on the Chinese and the Indians. There's lots of them, so that's a herd that'll take a long time to cull out. In fact, we may never even need to eat the bony butts of east africa.
Just a modest proposal is all I'm suggesting...
RS