Apple doesn't need anti-virus software, they just need an App Store for macs, where all software is linked to and signed by the author. This makes the author accountable. Apple has already incubated an "App Store Culture" so it wouldn't be a hard sell. OS X could sandbox non-app store apps and locally compiled apps and allow the user to assign a level of trust and or privileges to each. The default security level would allow only app store apps.
I haven't really put a lot of thought into this but it seems like a good idea on the surface. There wouldn't be a need to jailbreak a mac - you could just change the security level to allow non app store apps. It would also fit nicely into Apple's control-freak psycho personality. Just a thought.
Is this similar to CD/DVD with bumps and grooves and read/written by a laser? Or is it more like solid state drives/memory where the assembled block copolymers provide a foundation for the formation of transistors? More generally, is it random access or is there a seek time involved?
I think you've missed the point of __portable__ music players.
I'm holding out for Wi-Fi + Cell
on
WiFi Phone Announced
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
I had this crazy idea the other day of a blackberry type phone with wi-fi and cell access that had all the blackberry features plus jabber IM and presence.
Of course in my fantasy land this phone is super tiny with flexible display so that it can be unfolded along the vertical axis to double the screen width, has 30 day battery life, wireless headset support (the headset has 24 hr talk-time battery life), 40GB of removeable media (ok, ok, I'll settle for 10, but expandable to 100!), oh and the blackberry-style keyboard retracts into the body.
If the average (mean) really is 5 inches (as stated above), then given that there are guys with 10+ inch dicks, I pray for the poor guys on the extreme low end of the curve that the distribution is not normal - and is heavily skewed to the right!!!
In an interview with Toshitata Doi, President, Intelligent Research Dynamics Institute and Corporate Executive VP at Sony (aka the guy in charge of this thing), he is asked:
Thinking broadly, would you say non-human-like robots could be developed?
Oh, yes. A robot's body doesn't have to be humanoid. However, in the case of an entertainment robot, people seem to form an emotional connection more easily with a robot that walks on two legs. Humans seem to have a particular sensibility for things that resemble themselves. There are cells in the brain called mirror cells; they're structured so that when you see someone drink a cup of tea, the cells in your brain that get stimulated when you drink a cup of tea get stimulated. Knowing that from neurological science, it was essential to make our entertainment robot bipedal.
"If you need it enough you can pay for it's development"
Doesn't this support the "Higher TCO" argument?
Also, I'm pretty sure that in Economics 101 we all learned that specialization benefits everyone. In the extreme, imagine a company whose line of business is not IT-related (e.g. manufacturing widgits), who is faced with developing and maintaining numerous pieces of software to support their business. That is just not a good situation.
I'm not knocking OSS, rather I'm playing devil's advocate. We must realize that there are risks and trade-offs when choosing between open and closed source products (there's also a spectrum of options between open and closed).
Wow. It's stunningly obvious that you've completely missed the point of SlimDevices products.
1. You don't need to synch - there's no local memory/storage 2. It's not a portable device 3. It supports both OGG AND AAC 4. See 1 and 2 5. It's the same price as the cheapest IPod (ok, $1 more), but this is pointless because they aren't even competing in the same market!
IPod = Portable digital music player / HDD Squeezebox = Wireless, digital home audio player
OK, I'm gonna be kinda vague here, but I don't want to get my friend canned...
Anyways my friend just got hired by a design firm to develop prototype bluetooth headphones. From what I understand the transmitter would be modular so that it could plug into existing cell phones and mp3 players.
Obviously this particular design won't be hitting stores by Christmas, but I would expect to see them by this time next year.
Concerts: 1. What good is global distribution for a small band that only plays small clubs locally? 2. Even for a big-name band, it's damn near impossible to organize a single large-venue concert without the backing of a major label and concert promoter. Pearl Jam tried a few years ago and couldn't pull it off.
So marketing your concerts by giving music away doesn't really help. There are some labels like Wind-Up that make their band's singles available for download, which to me has always been a great compromise.
Merchandise: 1. A band is lucky if 1% of the people who buy their albums actually buy merchandise as well. Once you start giving your music away that percentage will not scale with the number of people downloading the song (i.e. 100 x more listeners 100 x more merch sales). Band margins on merch sales is significant but is hardly enough to support the production of new songs. 2. OK, there is no #2.
The caveat to the above (and this has been speculated elsewhere), is that bands may begin to focus a lot more on singles and we may find ourselves back in the days of the 45 where bands only released singles with B-sides.
To store the memory, the researchers use the wires and the diode surrounding the PEDOT blob to run either a high or a low current through it.
...
In their paper in Nature, the researchers describe just one such junction. But for a memory application, the device will need many more.
So they've gotten it to work with one BLOB of this polymer! I haven't read the Nature article but elsewhere I can't find any mention on how they plan on achieving the suggested density. This sounds like a cool idea but there also seems to be a lot of Marketing Hype(tm) mixed in.
In an ideal world, the database would be fully normalized, all of the business logic would be performed through the abstracted business layer and the analysis could also be done through the business layer against the normalized database.
Now before everyone starts screaming, "this can be done!". Yeah, yeah I know it can. But not everyone can afford it. So that's why for cost-effective, well performing solutions we still use ugly work-arounds including database-level stored procs.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised it's not Gooble SideWave.
Hmmm, if that had been a comment on slashdot it would have been modded Funny.
Apple doesn't need anti-virus software, they just need an App Store for macs, where all software is linked to and signed by the author. This makes the author accountable. Apple has already incubated an "App Store Culture" so it wouldn't be a hard sell. OS X could sandbox non-app store apps and locally compiled apps and allow the user to assign a level of trust and or privileges to each. The default security level would allow only app store apps. I haven't really put a lot of thought into this but it seems like a good idea on the surface. There wouldn't be a need to jailbreak a mac - you could just change the security level to allow non app store apps. It would also fit nicely into Apple's control-freak psycho personality. Just a thought.
Hmmm, NASA should save billions of dollars and just buy 2 model rockets - drop their fail rate down to 25%.
Is this similar to CD/DVD with bumps and grooves and read/written by a laser? Or is it more like solid state drives/memory where the assembled block copolymers provide a foundation for the formation of transistors? More generally, is it random access or is there a seek time involved?
Next step: vacuum-sealed units.
Umm, I think what you meant to say is, "The robot must know that it is a robot" ;-)
Is it just me or is this just the opposite trend that we're seeing on the desktop right now with the desktop search wars?
Web: Let's classify every site on the web by using contextual DNS suffixes
Desktop: Let's forget about file extensions and index everything by data and metadata and provide intuitive search functionality.
I realize that there are independent, underlying technical, political and marketing reasons for this but at a logical level it really seems strange.
The web is coming from where the desktop is going... and vice versa.
why?
a) for the same reason that every meeting room in the world has a white board.
b) Annotating documents - 'nuff said
c) Pretty much any task that would currently require a lot of switching between keyboard/mouse (hard to avoid with most windows apps)
I'm sure there are more reasons...
I have no idea what I'm talking about
Couldn't this idea leverage the concept of bittorrent, or P2P in general, except push the sharing up to the server level?
I think you've missed the point of __portable__ music players.
I had this crazy idea the other day of a blackberry type phone with wi-fi and cell access that had all the blackberry features plus jabber IM and presence.
Of course in my fantasy land this phone is super tiny with flexible display so that it can be unfolded along the vertical axis to double the screen width, has 30 day battery life, wireless headset support (the headset has 24 hr talk-time battery life), 40GB of removeable media (ok, ok, I'll settle for 10, but expandable to 100!), oh and the blackberry-style keyboard retracts into the body.
Mmmmm, tasty fantasy land.
If the average (mean) really is 5 inches (as stated above), then given that there are guys with 10+ inch dicks, I pray for the poor guys on the extreme low end of the curve that the distribution is not normal - and is heavily skewed to the right!!!
... for me is that I can use it from Canada!
Same thing goes for Rhapsody, which is a kick-ass subscription service (if you're into that sort of thing).
In an interview with Toshitata Doi, President, Intelligent Research Dynamics Institute and Corporate Executive VP at Sony (aka the guy in charge of this thing), he is asked:
Thinking broadly, would you say non-human-like robots could be developed?
Oh, yes. A robot's body doesn't have to be humanoid. However, in the case of an entertainment robot, people seem to form an emotional connection more easily with a robot that walks on two legs. Humans seem to have a particular sensibility for things that resemble themselves. There are cells in the brain called mirror cells; they're structured so that when you see someone drink a cup of tea, the cells in your brain that get stimulated when you drink a cup of tea get stimulated. Knowing that from neurological science, it was essential to make our entertainment robot bipedal.
"emails about personal events in lives of my fellow employes (marriage, death) etc . about which I don't care
Wow, you must have a lot of friends at work!
"If you need it enough you can pay for it's development"
Doesn't this support the "Higher TCO" argument?
Also, I'm pretty sure that in Economics 101 we all learned that specialization benefits everyone. In the extreme, imagine a company whose line of business is not IT-related (e.g. manufacturing widgits), who is faced with developing and maintaining numerous pieces of software to support their business. That is just not a good situation.
I'm not knocking OSS, rather I'm playing devil's advocate. We must realize that there are risks and trade-offs when choosing between open and closed source products (there's also a spectrum of options between open and closed).
Wow. It's stunningly obvious that you've completely missed the point of SlimDevices products.
1. You don't need to synch - there's no local memory/storage
2. It's not a portable device
3. It supports both OGG AND AAC
4. See 1 and 2
5. It's the same price as the cheapest IPod (ok, $1 more), but this is pointless because they aren't even competing in the same market!
IPod = Portable digital music player / HDD
Squeezebox = Wireless, digital home audio player
Am I the only one suspicious that the parent sounds like a tablet PC marketing pamphlet?
OK, I'm gonna be kinda vague here, but I don't want to get my friend canned...
Anyways my friend just got hired by a design firm to develop prototype bluetooth headphones. From what I understand the transmitter would be modular so that it could plug into existing cell phones and mp3 players.
Obviously this particular design won't be hitting stores by Christmas, but I would expect to see them by this time next year.
"..because it's such cheap advertisement..."
For what? Their concerts and merchandise?
Concerts:
1. What good is global distribution for a small band that only plays small clubs locally?
2. Even for a big-name band, it's damn near impossible to organize a single large-venue concert without the backing of a major label and concert promoter. Pearl Jam tried a few years ago and couldn't pull it off.
So marketing your concerts by giving music away doesn't really help. There are some labels like Wind-Up that make their band's singles available for download, which to me has always been a great compromise.
Merchandise:
1. A band is lucky if 1% of the people who buy their albums actually buy merchandise as well. Once you start giving your music away that percentage will not scale with the number of people downloading the song (i.e. 100 x more listeners 100 x more merch sales). Band margins on merch sales is significant but is hardly enough to support the production of new songs.
2. OK, there is no #2.
The caveat to the above (and this has been speculated elsewhere), is that bands may begin to focus a lot more on singles and we may find ourselves back in the days of the 45 where bands only released singles with B-sides.
So they've gotten it to work with one BLOB of this polymer! I haven't read the Nature article but elsewhere I can't find any mention on how they plan on achieving the suggested density. This sounds like a cool idea but there also seems to be a lot of Marketing Hype(tm) mixed in.
Hey, if you're not used to carrying 8 inches around in your pants then that's your problem ;-)
We do it for performance reasons.
In an ideal world, the database would be fully normalized, all of the business logic would be performed through the abstracted business layer and the analysis could also be done through the business layer against the normalized database.
Now before everyone starts screaming, "this can be done!". Yeah, yeah I know it can. But not everyone can afford it. So that's why for cost-effective, well performing solutions we still use ugly work-arounds including database-level stored procs.